Jump to content

Talk:Clinic escort

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shield v. Insulate

[edit]

I feel that Shield is an inherently POV term. It is an inherently defensive term, implying that what lays on the other side is harmful. I suggest insulate be used in stead but I understand that word is a bit limited as well. - Schrandit (talk) 14:47, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Spotfixer (talk) 14:57, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Its a tad unreasonable to fail to offer a reason, to fail to be open to persuasion. - Schrandit (talk) 15:31, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is little that needs to be said in response to a weak argument. You think "shield" is POV. So what? I think "insulate" is POV. Next. Spotfixer (talk) 15:47, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What about the word "buffer"? I think insulate is a poor choice because it is an odd usage. I have very rarely, if ever, encountered such a usage of insulate, normally finding it in reference to electrical, heating, cooling work. The usage is almost poetic, and therefore the tone is not encyclopedic. As for shield, I don't mind it that much, but I can understand, to some extent, how it implies a sort of POV dynamic of the situation that may favor the pro-choice POV (that said, people often say "shielded from the truth" which could apply in this situation from a pro-life POV). I'd be open to changing the word, not so much for POV reasons, but because like insulate, shield is a more poetic usage of the term and clearly can connote a defensive weapon which is not used by escorts. So the first thing that came to mind was "buffer". Could we all agree to changing the word shield to buffer? Or, for the sake of compromise and getting along with everyone, could we address Schrandit's concerns by coming up with another word that we can all live with? The idea of consensus isn't to create a stalemate, or a no-win situation, but instead to try to address people's concerns, even if you disagree with them, in a manner that satisfies everyone to some degree. If not that, we should at least try harder to persuade others of our positions so there is no longer a need to compromise. -Andrew c [talk] 16:57, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be a fan, "buffer" would pretty well address my concerns. - Schrandit (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew, my concern with both "buffer" and "insulate" is that they make it sound as if the escort's job is to keep two parties separated so that neither one harms the other. This is simply not the case, as the women who come to the clinic do so for the purpose of entering the clinic, not to engage in conflicts with protesters, while the protesters' primary goal is to "save babies" by berating women into carrying unwanted pregnancies to term.

The key here is that the protesters are not at risk from the women who are trying to enter to clinic. Rather, it is these women who are being verbally and sometimes physically attacked and need to be defended. It is therefore the job of the escort to act as a guard. Note that a shield is not a defensive weapon; it's not a weapon at all. It's just anything that protects someone from an attack by blocking it. Spotfixer (talk) 17:10, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a pretty one sided summation of what goes on at an abortion clinic. Again, I'm comfortable with "buffer", open to other suggestions. - Schrandit (talk) 17:13, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Buffers are two-sided; they're an empty area that keeps two things apart. A shield has a side you hold it by and a side that swords bounce off. Clinic escorts are interested in protecting the safety of clinic clients, not defending protesters. So, unless you wish to claim that these vicious baby murderers are attacking the sweet, innocent baby-lovers, your argument has been refuted.

Oh, and I noticed your attempt to get moderators to ban me for edit warring has failed. You've also followed it up with... more edit-warring. I will revert those changes when time permits and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it. Spotfixer (talk) 17:18, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clinic "escorts" do attempt to shutter the free speech of the protesters in order to secure their revenue stream (if we're going to be using rhetoric) and in that regard their mission is decidedly two-sided.
Per the 3RR that was hardly an attempt to ban you but you might have missed that while you were trying to leave anonymous warnings on my talk page (if we're getting off topic). - Schrandit (talk) 17:26, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to argue Constitutional law with someone who thinks that protecting women from abuse violates the First Amendment rights of the abusers. Nor will I discuss the fine points of Wikipedia policy with someone who thinks that it's even possible to leave an anonymous message while logged in, falsely accused other of 3RR while violating it themselves and engages in massive edit warring. Clearly, you are in a world of your own and I will kindly leave you to it.

At this point, it is not my aim to convince you of anything. Fortunately, I don't need to. Instead, I will continue to do the right thing and follow Wikipedia rules, even when this puts me in conflict with your ignorant and self-serving misinterpretations of the rules. Spotfixer (talk) 17:34, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Clinic escort. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:42, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clinic escort. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:33, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clinic escort. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:34, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Inconsistency

[edit]

Barrett is called "bodyguard" in John Britton and Paul Jennings Hill, but "clinic escort" in Clinic escort and in the source in Paul Jennings Hill.

The two terms describe fundamentally different concepts, so this should be fixed in all articles.

There appears to be no source for "bodyguard", so I would favor "clinic escort". ---- 91.10.39.145 (talk) 05:31, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

COPIED FOR INFORMATION ONLY, PLEASE DISCUSS ONLY AT Talk:John_Britton_(doctor)#Inconsistency. ---- 91.10.39.145 (talk) 05:34, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

After reading this article, my impressions:

  • Section "The debate surrounding abortion" is essay-like and could probably be replaced by a single link to the main abortion debate article somewhere.
  • Section "Anti-abortion protests and violence" is likewise better covered at anti-abortion violence.
  • Section "Clinic escorts and abortion laws" should probably only concentrate on the aspects surrounding escorts. Here again abortion law is the main article.

WP:MNA also applies. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 18:40, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Clinic_escort&oldid=1195168269"