Mason  🏃‍♂️ ✂️

In SF, people are still not permitted to gather in groups of >12. Even outdoors. Even with full mask & distancing compliance. Even for weddings. Even for funerals. Whatever you think of the protests, they have *got* to be wearing down the sense of solidarity required for this.

Their conclusion is not that protests don't spread coronavirus, but that non-protesters seem to be more likely to stay in during mass protest events. They even suggest that this may be due in part to declining mental health. The coverage on this has been godawful.

So.... are you saying that protests are good for decreasing covid spread because it keeps non-protestors inside? I'm genuinely not following the point you're trying to make and am actually curious. The original post sounded anti-protest-y

Protests appear to be on net relatively neutral for COVID spread in large part because they utterly fuck over public spaces for non-protesters, many of whom are already struggling to get out of bed. Hope that's clearer.

I’m not sure how this is even relevant when protests are not occupying whole cities’ streets. They aren’t “utterly fucking over” public access - as I understand it they are located in a relatively small proximity, with huge amounts of cities unaffected by crowds protesting.

the paper has an interesting premise but it’s more likely due to the reporting than protests themselves. I live a block from the target that was set on fire and yet I go to protests (not to meet my needs or to feel morally superior), I get outside responsibly every single day>

>and am careful to the extreme regarding covid. It’s a point worth interrogating but I don’t think it’s a primary scapegoat; there are sooo many other places to get outside than the tiny areas that protests are occurringhttps://twitter.com/msgbaloo/status/1287840996424728576 …