A couple of weeks ago, my school’s paper treated me to a delightful September suprise: a series of opinion articles about feminism. Notable campus feminists “Jon the English Major” and “Matt the Magazine Journalism Major” graced us with their opinions on feminism (conclusion, it could use a make-over; have we considered taking Jon’s girlfriend as sort of a model for the perfect feminist?) It was too adorable for words, especially the imaginary conversation Jon’s girlfriend had with the evil “matriarchists” who were trying to tempt her away from Jon for sex with random men. But Jon’s girlfriend was having none of that – she’s a Sensible Feminist. She treats the radical lesbian fornicators to a prim little speech and is rewarded with an engagement to Jon and they lived happily ever after until they had kids and all of the sudden she finds that Jon wasn’t as much a feminist as he said when they were dating.
But that’s for later.
It could have been worse for Jon’s girl. Men’s News Daily brings us the tragic story of Shaun’s girlfriend, The Girl Who Didn’t Resist Feminism’s Siren Song and Therefore Lost a Boyfriend.
I began to see just how serious the matter really was when I began dating a Knox student in my Junior year. She was a freshman and really was a nice girl; I counted myself very fortunate to have met her. That she had some feminist tendencies did not bother me, because she was a moderate compared to everyone else in her suite.
Over time, the influence of her radical friends had its impact on her…[insert standard "Vagina Monologues showed me the evils of feminism" boilerplate testimony #6]…
I eventually broke up with her.
That’s right, girls. Sure, it seems so harmless…a one woman play here, going to see a performance artist or to the show for a feminist photographer, maybe even a trip to the Big City to see that Vagina Monologue play everyone keeps talking about. Then the next thing you know you’ve tried out a few arguments from your Intro to Women’s Studies textbook of excerpts from essays by notable feminists on your boyfriend and he up and leaves you. Well, you can kind of see his point, can’t you? And of course now that you’ve been tainted by the tainting taint of feminism, no real man will ever want you again and you have no choice but to purchase a vibrator get practicing for the next Student NOW meeting/lesbian feminist orgy. And not the sexy kind of lesbian orgy, either. This will be the kind that involves actual lesbians. Well, that’s what you get for trying out new ideas in college. What did you think would happen?
Anyway, back to Shaun. Standard bitch – blah blah blah, was totally progressive blah blah bitch went too far blah blah forced by their unreasonaing hatred to adopt reactionary views at a tragically young age blah blah blah Y’all coulda had this but now you’ll have NOTHNG blah blah I’m taking my ball and going home. Why do we care about Shaun? Well, we don’t, but David R. Usher does.
David R. Usher is not unknown to readers of Pandagon or the Supreme Court of Missouri. David got divorced nearly 20 years ago and he’s apparently still a little miffed. He got a replacement woman eventually, but that hasn’t seemed to slow him down. Hey, if you can make a living off of shrieking in panic about feminism, then why not. The current bug up David’s butt is Knox college, where he gave some sort of workshop in the late 90′s that apparently didn’t work out so well.
I became aware of this about five years ago when I visited my alma mater, Knox College. I was quite distressed about the invisibility of any perspective that might disagree in any way with feminist lesbian/gay agenda.
My insistence that Knox permit other thinking and to devote minimal educational resources to the establishment of a legitimate men’s studies program resulted in a letter from Roger Taylor, President of Knox, informing me that my email address was banned by Knox. This was done because campus feminists deemed my email messages to be “harassing” or “offensive”.
Oh, God, for a peek at that letter, or those emails. All I could find on the internet was this.
Then, in the comments, things get a little interesting. David apparently believes that since some college have a women’s studies interdiciplinary program, they should in the interest of fairness have a men’s studies program (knee jerk reaction: wouldn’t men’s studies be covered in oh, say, the rest of the friggin’ departments? Ok, smarmy knee-jerk reaction over).
And it turns out that a few do, and they call it gender studies. But in the comments of MND, David outlines his requirements for a good men’s studies program:
Here are some litmus criteria:
1. When you visit the campus, do you see indication of political or student activity other than gay/lesbian/feminist?2. Does the library have a copy of Warren Farrell’s book “Myth of Male Power”, or Sanford Braver’s book “Divorced Dad’s: Shattering the Myths”? Does the library have a lot of gay male books mis-categorized in the “Men’s Studies” category?
3. Does the college have a legitimate men’s studies program that operates entirely independently of the women’s studies program and independently of the psychology department, and is not a gay men’s operation masquerading as a legitimate men’s group?
4. Ask the President about these things directly. If he responds negatively or attempts to change the subject, its time to look elsewhere.
That’s an interesting list of requirements he’s got there. Could you imagine a women’s studies department saying, “well, lesbians don’t count.” For some reason David finds this a perfectly reasonable statement when applied to men. How could you have a dicipline devoted to studying men and then exclude a bunch of men? It bewilders me; it makes me think that maybe David’s motives are not pure.
But let’s for a second assume that David really wants men to start devoting large chuncks of time to majoring in Men’s Studies. It would be a sad commentary of a sexist society indeed if such a major was held in higher esteem than the highly esteemed women’s studies major just because it was all about men – and very likely it wouldn’t be. People might laugh at a man who majored in Men’s Studies, even though they’d never laugh at a Women’s Studies major, oh no.
So just to make sure he’s aware of what he’s asking for, I present to him this regendered article from a completely unbiased Christian ‘zine, “I Have A Degree In Women’s Studies, Why Can’t I Pay the Rent?”
Good thing “Entrance of the Gladiators” is still playing. 8^D
Fap, fap, fap, fap, fap, fap, fap, fap….
It amuses me to see misogynists claim victory over utter failure. Boys, boys, boys – how many times does it need to be pointed out to you that rape statistics are inherently flawed. Now, it is clear that all you’re really after is bashing feminists, so I don’t expect that you’ll actually allow any info to penetrate those bankvault thick skulls. But, since you have clearly not understood a thing said to you, and keep whining about how no one will take you seriously, here:
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/crimprof_blog/2004/12/2_false_rape_st.html
What’s important about this link: “One startling point in the paper was that no reliable statistics exist on the frequency of false rape claims: “As a scientific matter, the frequency of false rape complaints to police or other legal authorities remains unknown.”
You see, boys, neither your imaginary 41% or the oft repeated 2% are ACCURATE. Now, I don’t want you little kittens to have a heart attack over the sudden loss of your overwhelming victory – so sit down and take deep breaths.
A problem is that most times researches will include retracted accusations in with allegations known to be false. Except, why the accusation was retracted isn’t known. It could have been that the “victim” was lying, it might have been that they received threats of violence, or that they knew their past (which is a huge factor in rape cases) will bias the court against them. There are numerous reasons.
Yes, false accusations due occur. However (for the 3 millionth time) the amounts of unreported rape – be it female, or male victims – is astronomically higher. Therefore – Statisitics. On. False. Rape. Claims. Are. Not.Reliable. (deep breaths, boys, deep breaths)
I have volunteered in shelters for nearly a decade. Having seen quite a bit of the damage humans will do to each other, it no longer surprises me to see a woman stumble into the shelter bleeding and beaten – and not press charges. You can quote your skewed and biased stats all you like – you will not erase what I have seen with my own eyes.
But, since you’re clearly comforted by calling women liars on the basis of male privledge (meaning: this most likely won’t happen to you, so you don’t have to worry about skewed stats or outright lies) and skewed stats, keep at it. Though, would you mind wearing a sign around your neck in public so we know who to avoid? Thanks.
Here’s another:
This links also talks about the troubles of getting accurate statistics.
http://www.cjr.org/archives.asp?url=/97/6/rape.asp
“Kanin of Purdue warned against reading too much into his examination of the small midwestern city: “Certainly our intent is not to suggest that the 41 percent incidence found here be extrapolated to other populations, particularly in light of our ignorance regarding the structural variables.”
There it is crystal clear. RKMK, JackGoff, and R. Mildred have made it very clear that they believe everysingle man who is accused of rape is without a doubt a rapist.
Finally we get to the MRA “if it doesn’t privelage men over women, it’s discriminatory to men” logic.
No, not believing that a woman accusing a man of rape is by default lying/asked for it, is not the same thing as believing that all men who are accused of rape are by default rapists, there’s just very little reason for believing that a woman would actually go through the life destroying bullshit associated with making a rape accusation that goes to trial, so the most sensible approach – I’m talking about logic here you see, I’m sure you can find a dictionary that’ll give you a brief outline on what that is, because I’m not defining another basic concept of thinking, again, for you – is to assume that unless it can be proven otherwise, that the woman is not making her story up.
Again, Occam’s razor dude.
Dude I think Lya is totally into you. She called you “sweety” and “honey” and said “Awwwwwww” when she thought you were hurt…. hehehe.
When someone seems that incoherent and seems to hate you that much, they’re trying to hide their true feelings, a warmth growing in their heart despite their best efforts to repress it.
Now I’m starting to see the personal investment in discrediting rape victims.
Williams, when someone insults you and acts like she hates you, assume she means it. When she says she doesn’t want to fuck you, assume she means it. When she doesn’t say anything at all, assume it’s because she hates you and doesn’t want to fuck you.
Charlie McCarthy, when you insult Lya by suggesting that she’s attracted to Williams, you reveal yourself as far more shrewd than Williams himself. Good show.
“Now I’m starting to see the personal investment in discrediting rape victims.”
Glad I’m not the only one who sees it. There was too much juvenile misogyny in those posts to even bother with (the grade school logic made me laugh, though). They made my point for me.
“You see, boys, neither your imaginary 41% or the oft repeated 2% are ACCURATE.” -Lya
Lya are you an idiot or not? So far everything in your Nov 30th, 2006 at 6:56 am post tells me you are idiot. You see unlike the 2% myth, the 41% is cited. If you want to whine and bitch and moan about the size of study or the methodology fine, but get it into your pea brain that it still isn’t “imaginary”, it is cited unlike the little 2% myth which “Hanny Boy” challenged the fucktards to find.
“Occam’s Razor, Occam’s Razor, Occam’s Razor!” OK obviously the vaginismus don’t have a fucking clue what Occam’s Razor is….
1. Occam’s Razor is never considered a proof.
2. Occam’s Razor says that the most likely solution is obtained when one shaves off as much uncertainty as possible. Sorry kiddies, but the 41% is more certain than a totally uncited percent.
3. Our argument is that a cited statistic found 41% of rape accusations to be false and jurors find accused rape defendents innocent 42% of the time (RKMK’s data).
4. You’re argument is that an uncertain number of rape accusations are valid, an uncertain number of rape’s are reported, an uncertian number of valid rapists are infact convicted with a felony charge and our statisic is uncertain because it might be too small of a sample to be representative so most rape accusations are valid. OK ignoring the fact that your logic doesn’t follow, reference (2)…the solution with the least uncertainty is likely the best.
Hmmm, whose argument is simpler? Whose argument has less uncertainty? Not to mention whose argument has a cited source?
Damnit, I made an argument! Or did I simply shred your Occam’s Razor banter? Of course I left out the uncertainty of “Duh, maybe Shaun, Psi, Adam, Zarkov and Vultan are the same person….I duditz!”
*************************Occam’s Razor…the New 2%!!*!*******************(Kyso whispers to JackGoff and Lya: Now that they fucked our 2% chant, just start chanting Occam’s Razor everytime you can’t beat their argument!)
Why don’t you dumbshits go back to slapping your chest and trying to bite your own ear. And JackGOff, you told me you weren’t gay…Your mouth is for food not cock dude.
Fucking Preview lies! It looked so good, but when it posted it looked like shit. 8^P
Oh well, just wanted to chime in one more bit. Yeah, you guys definitely pistol whipped the shit out of the femmies.
P.S. Who wants to bet that instead of an argument against my last post, that they will just sneer at it and call me an ass?
Your mouth is for food not cock dude.
How cute. I used to think the same thing when I was in fourth grade.
What are they teaching you kids about Columbus these days? Have they finally gone PC on that one?
1. Occam’s Razor is never considered a proof.
Occam’s razor was invented to shut up idiots who kept blaming everything on aliens, actually.
I’m sorry, you seem to have forgotten to actually back up you assertion that Occam’s razor was being used as “a proof” with anything in the way of actual evidence, so until you do, and then get your comment published in a peer reviewed and respectable scientific journal, we’re afraid we just can’t take your point as in anyway valid.
Occam’s was being used as indicative, mainly to indicate the overly complex, and I can’t emphasise enough that when I say “overly complex” I mean “really really stupid”, nature of a theory that assumes that all women who take a rape accusation to court are of course lying whores, and that men need greater protection under law from the great rape-accussing horde that is threatening to topple society as I type through the inscrutable and persistent claiming that a guy raped her by a small minority of fiendish women, ones that probably go around poking babies in the mouth with sticks made of asbestos, just for fun!
And we won’t call you an ass, the highest up the tree of life you get is “a concussed butterfly who lost a wing in a freak christmas tree accident and now travels around in short but tragicomic little flips from one side to the other.”
Actually, I invoked Occam’s razor against JackGoff’s own snark, not against any of your arguments. But please, don’t reading comprehension stop you from adding another two posts to my glorious thread.
Did anyone else get a huge kick out of the KKK troll completely losing his composure over the word “imaginary” while totally missing the point altogether? It’s hilarious that they keep claiming victory while they totally fail – fail to make a point that doesn’t descend into obvious misogyny, and failing to comprehend anything said to them.
MRA trolls are fun, but pitiable.
“Occam’s razor was invented to shut up idiots who kept blaming everything on aliens, actually.”
Actually, the concept was coined by William Occam in the 14th century. Alien sightings were rare in the 14th century.
“I mean “really really stupid”, nature of a theory that assumes that all women who take a rape accusation to court are of course lying whores”
Sigh. Once again I see that R. “Strawman” Mille, strikes again:
False rape accusations – according to evidence cited by women on this thread from Ampersand – are usually a product of the trauma and confusion experienced by the woman – not out of lying or any malicious intent.
Again. We have NEVER said that all women who report rape are lying. We have never suggested it happens in every or even in a significant portion of cases.
Again. We have NEVER said that all women who report rape are lying. We have never suggested it happens in every or even in a significant portion of cases.
Again. We have NEVER said that all women who report rape are lying. We have never suggested it happens in every or even in a significant portion of cases.
If there is anyway I can make this clearer I have not discovered it.
“and that men need greater protection under law.”
All we want is for rape accusers to have to provide something other than their word – the word of the accused. All we want is justice. What do you want?
We win.
You whine.
And that’s final.
And JackGOff, you told me you weren’t gay
When did I say that?
Shorter Adam: Fap, fap, fap, fap, fap, fap, fap
“It’s hilarious that they keep claiming victory while they totally fail – fail to make a point that doesn’t descend into obvious misogyny, and failing to comprehend anything said to them.”
hahahahahah
Let’s see, off the top of my head how are you doing in the debate so far:
Well for starters your CJR evidence cites three recent studies – which all put false rape at a minimum of 4 times the average of false reporting for other crimes.
We have MLMK’s evidence which shows that rape is the second most successfully convicted crime.
We have a yet to be refuted study which uses the least subjective measure possible (DNA testing) of 10,000 cases which shows a false rate at 20%-40%. This conducted by the FBI.
We also have Han’s 41% statistic which was published in a peer review journal – just consult Han’s link.
We also have examples – stories of men going to jail all over the nation on nothing more than the word of a witness – which never, ever happens with any other crime (courts don’t like witnesses – as they are notoriously unreliable).
That’s some of what we have.
You have an uncited 2% statistic which you have already admitted is wrong.
(Notice that half of the evidence we have came from your sources. Most of you seem incapable of getting evidence that actually supports your contentions – although I begining to suspect that you don’t have an argument – just fallacies)
I mean what are you trying to say? That false rape isn’t a problem?
That’s not what the evidence suggests – and even if only 2% of cases were false – shouldn’t we set up our judicial system so that 100% of the cases require more than testimony to send a defendent to jail?
Once again – do you any of you have a point?
(btw none of our challenges have been met)
We win
You whine
Once again, deal.
I like the slightly different personalities Williams has created for each of his sockpuppets. They even seem to have their own catchphrases now. When I can bring myself to care, I think I’ll catalog them.
I stopped following this thread for a while. Who’s trolling whom at the moment?
Good question.
It’s kind of like a Mobieus strip of trolling, really.
After rereading this I had to repost it.
“You’re argument is that an uncertain number of rape accusations are valid, an uncertain number of rape’s are reported, an uncertian number of valid rapists are infact convicted with a felony charge and our statisic is uncertain because it might be too small of a sample to be representative so most rape accusations are valid. OK ignoring the fact that your logic doesn’t follow, reference (2)…the solution with the least uncertainty is likely the best.
Hmmm, whose argument is simpler? Whose argument has less uncertainty? Not to mention whose argument has a cited source?” – Hans Zarkov Nov 30th
I just couldn’t stop laughing when Hans blasted your Occum’s razor red herring.
Oh yeah and I just noticed something even more funny that excaped my attention earlier -
“[S]o until you do, and then get your comment published in a peer reviewed and respectable scientific journal, we’re afraid we just can’t take your point as in anyway valid.” – Millie
And there you have it. We lost, guys, because we didn’t first get our entries published in a respectable and referred scientific journal before posting them on this thread. How dare we?!?
This from a side that has yet to even cite evidence from a peer-referred journal.
Oh – and (suprise) none of them have responded to our challenges. At all.
We won.
You whine.
Kyso, you think there’s really a priaprism-of-trolls, or is it just an army of cum-stained-sock puppets from the same rancid dorm room?…
We won.
You whine.
They fap.
We don’t care.
Mike, I don’t know and considering the fountain of delights this Occam’z razor thing is spewing, I don’t care. They are, as far as I can tell, generally posting from different IPs now. I can only go back a few comments, so I can’t do a timeline of IPs vs nicknames, not that I have that much time or motivation anyway.
I guess it probably smells just as bad either way…
14 more to go before 400?…
Thirteen
*faps*
I think what Adam North is trying to say here is that he wants privacy laws repealed and for it to be made legal for men to tape the woman they have sex with, or at least to get her to admit on tape that she consents to sex with him and his MRA buddies before said intercourse. Who will ever know whether there was a gun pointed to her out of the camera range, but that is besides the point really, after all we know that death threat allegations are simply false. And we cant agree on the stats anyway.
Elsewhere MRAs have been advocating that all men secretly film their sexual activities so there can be no disputes over consent. I guess this means that when the cold day in hell arrives and I decide to have sex with a patriarchal, misogynist bastard, I’ll just take him back to my place instead.
Trolls- try READING THE LINKS I PROVIDED. See what the people who did the study you keeping beating off on SAYS about it.
Kittens, READ what is posted to you in response. TRY to comprehend it.
For the LAST TIME – THE STATS ON FALE RAPE ALLEGATIONS ARE NOT RELIABLE. I HAVE POSTED TWO LINKS THAT EXPLAIN WHY. THERFORE, IT DOES NOT MATTER HOW MANY TIME YOU BEAT OFF TO IT, IT WILL NEVER BE A VALID EXAMPLE OF THE ENTIRE COUNTRY’S RAPE ALLEGATIONS.
So, you “win” in the sense that you’ve really driven home the point that y’all have a distrubing interest in erasing rape, and you “totally fail” in the sense that simply because you:
1. distortb what was said in response in a sad attempt at discrediting it
2. completely ignore that which you can’t refute (yes I noticed that you dodged it.)
3. keep hounding on a point that has long since been deflated
and
4. people are now making fun of you rather than playing “Poke the trolls”
Does not equal a “win”.
P.s. I would suggest looking up big words like “whining” before using them in a sentence. You don’t apparently know what it means.
or at least to get her to admit on tape that she consents to sex with him and his MRA buddies before said intercourse.
They should totally implement this plan in their own lives if they are so concenred. I think the waiver idea has been floated in MRA threads before, and I think it’s great. I really do. Everyone who is as concerned as our new friends about being falsely accused of rape after perfectly innocent sex by a vengeful hoyden should always keep a copy of a sex release form with their condoms. That’ll let them bitches know who they’re dealing with.
“That’ll let them bitches know who they’re dealing with.”
This idea, combined with labelling MRA’s in public should pretty much erase the deadbeat daddy problem, huh. Not getting any is the absolute best way to avoid being “tricked and forced” into paying child support, or being “falsely accused” of rape.
We lost, guys, because we didn’t first get our entries published in a respectable and referred scientific journal before posting them on this thread. How dare we?!?
Oh my gawd.
6 more.
Kyso Kisaen – “They should totally implement this plan in their own lives if they are so concenred. I think the waiver idea has been floated in MRA threads before, and I think it’s great. I really do. Everyone who is as concerned as our new friends about being falsely accused of rape after perfectly innocent sex by a vengeful hoyden should always keep a copy of a sex release form with their condoms. That’ll let them bitches know who they’re dealing with.”
The cool thing would be that it’s a great warning. If somebody makes the mistake of going out with one of these losers and he whips the release form out, you know to run like hell, no further thought needed.
Saves everybody a lot of pain a grief…
It’s just the logical extension of safe sex. Of course, in a long-term, monogamous relationship you can maybe make it a once-a-month blanket waiver. But for one-night stands, I suggest the added protection of a notary.
But for one-night stands, I suggest the added protection of a notary.
I wonder if there’s a special secretary who lives next to karl rove’s bed and jots down notes during his freaky sex with restrained animals (he is president of “People for the Erotic Treatment of Animals” after all).
There’s probably long lines of that old style printer paper with the notches down the side containing nothing but the words “Baa!” and “Oh yes Jeffy-poo, let my meat shishkabob you so good!“, written over and over again on it.
And every morning the secretary wakes up and cries for the horrorific nature of her existence.
Of course, she may be chased, tackled to the ground and raped, but hey, no matter, her accusation will simply be seen as false and the likelihood of prosecution resulting in prison time will be slim.
Just…one….more…..*gasp*!
And we win
Beers on me!
Did Kyso drink that keg already?…
Eh, as someone has clued me into (I believe on this blog) Can there be too much beer?
Wow. I can’t believe they are back to whining that everyone who is against them is the same person. Personally if I was them, I would much rather that Shaun, Adam, Psi, Kinder and I were all DIFFERENT people….Seems to me they would be LESS embarassed about getting their asses kicked by 5 people than 1. Oh and sorry guys, but even if we were one person, that doesn’t invalidate our arguments.
“I like the slightly different personalities Williams has created for each of his sockpuppets.” -junk science, Nov 30.
“Kyso, you think there’s really a priaprism-of-trolls, or is it just an army of cum-stained-sock puppets from the same rancid dorm room?…” -MikeEss, Nov 30.
“Now Shaun’s pretending one of his alter egos is female? Awesome” – junk science, Nov 20.
“Either a ‘Priapism of Trolls’, or an interesting case of ‘Dissociative identity disorder.’” – MikeEss, Nov 20.
“Shaun is just posting under 15 different identities…” – Quin, Nov 20.
“”Shaun/Hans? Shans? Hauns?” -Junk Science Nov 17.
“ShaunHan…” -MikeEss, Nov 17.
“Just ask Kyso for our separation. (www.arin.net/whois/) Go ahead Kyso, tell them how far we are from each other. The site above will give you a location to match an IP go ahead and give it a look.” – Kinder, Nov 21.
“They are, as far as I can tell, generally posting from different IPs.” – Kyso, Nov 30.
*** Of course I could post many more, but I don’t see the point.***
I don’t see the point of Hans post. Thanks, but no, nobody need explain it to me.
Can someone pass me a schooner? Cheers.
Hans, I have to wonder if by now they’re just accusing you of being a sockpuppet to get your goat up. Well, actually I’m fairly certain. Congratulations, Kyso, on creating such an awfully long, awful thread.
To 500 and beyond!
“It’s hilarious that they keep claiming victory while they totally fail – fail to make a point that doesn’t descend into obvious misogyny, and failing to comprehend anything said to them.”
1. In a big person debate, when you claim victory, you need to say how you are claiming victory. The feminists have failed to show how they won.
2. I just got done reading the last 100 or so posts, and I notices one thing that I just want to talk about. The “all men are rapists” group contends that testimony alone should be what’s needed to send a man to prison for rape. Adam mentioned that testimony is not all that great, but I really think this point should be expanded upon.
The primary reason that testimony cannot be relied on is false memories. While you guys are mainly a bunch of physicists, I’m a psychologist. Human memories change and can be recalled in different ways, or even entirely fabricated. It’s like in 1984 where they change the past and everyone remembers it that way. Those stories of people who are abducted by aliens are a product of false memories, which can be created in a number of different ways, including through suggestive questioning and hypnosis.
Here’s some citations, hopefully enough to make everyone happy:
Here’s some general info (with further citations): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory
Journals and reputable magazines for Adam, Shaun, Hans, and anyone who cares about reputable sources.
Something from the APA: http://www.apa.org/monitor/mar00/memory.html
Scientific American: http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/sciam.htm
Psychology Today: http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20040406-000018.html
Psychology Today: http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-19930701-000006.html
… and I even included a blog for Jack “I cite from blogs” Goff
http://www.webword.com/2006/06/12/thoughts-on-false-memories/
If you take the time to read the articles, there’s a couple common themes of things that become false memories. One of the more prevelant false memories are those relating to sexual abuse. Suggestive questioning has been shown to cause false memories of abuse in a number of cases. The point is that we need more than testimony to accuse someone of rape.
So let me spell this out for the feminists….
False memories relating to sexual abuse are easy to cause with suggestive questioning methods.
Therefore testimony is 150% unreliable.
I wouldn’t drill this point so hard except for the fact that Lyo accused Adam of knowing nothing about rape cases when he suggested an increased burden of proof.
P.S. – > This whole thing is totally hilarious. A lot of people had me cracking up…
Thank you Andrew, but I couldn’t have done it alone. This isn’t my painfully long, troll-feeding super thread, it’s our painfully long, troll-feeding super thread.
And of course, none of us could have gotten anywhere near this many comments without the help of Hans, Kinder, Shaun and Psi. Thanks, guys, you’re the best!
when you claim victory
The victory was getting this thread to 200 comments, our criteria of failure was therefore defined by this thread not reaching 200 comments.
The primary reason that testimony cannot be relied on is false memories. While you guys are mainly a bunch of physicists, I’m a psychologist. Human memories change and can be recalled in different ways, or even entirely fabricated. It’s like in 1984 where they change the past and everyone remembers it that way. Those stories of people who are abducted by aliens are a product of false memories, which can be created in a number of different ways, including through suggestive questioning and hypnosis.
Actually a lot of those alien abduction stories occur as a result of sleep paralysis, what you mean is that so called “repressed” “memories” of “alien abductions” are a result of implanted false memories.
I would have gone with past life regression personally, because it’s a better example however, I also wouldn’t have whipped out false memories at all beause it’s a double edged sword – it’s just as easy, if not easier, to suppress or alter the accused’s memories so that his testimony that he didn’t rape her is just as dubious as her’s, if not less because our culture teaches men that it’s not rape to rape someone under whole load of conditions that allow men to ignore a woman saying “no” or being unconcious and having sex with them anyway, so it’s much more likely that even horribly guilty men would be under the sincere and no doubt logically consistent view that they are not rapists.
And so claims of false rape accusation based on the alleged victim’s testimony are in fact 200% unreliable, and if you can do the maths that means that rape accusations are -50% more reliable than not guilty pleas entered as replies to such things.
You know, with a name like “Vultan the Mighty,” I can see how you’d find consensual sex with a woman a somewhat unbelievable concept. Nevertheless, let me assure you that it does exist, if to a greater extent for people who don’t loudly and actively hate women.
Mildred…. thank you for supporting my point. Testimony is crap, which means we need some hard evidence to accuse someone of a crime. I also never said it didn’t work both ways, though there is more stuff documented about people coming up with memories of false abuse instead of people changing their memories of abuse to something less… well… abusive.
“You know, with a name like “Vultan the Mighty,” I can see how you’d find consensual sex with a woman a somewhat unbelievable concept. Nevertheless, let me assure you that it does exist, if to a greater extent for people who don’t loudly and actively hate women.”
With a name like “Junk Science” I can see how you totally missed the point and assumed I’m a women hater because I require something known as burden of proof. No one on this forum has said that they hate women, we are all looking for justice here, the argument is over what is justice and how to go about getting it.