1) Satanic Panic - satanism in the day cares ahhhh!
2) "Repressed memory" syndrome
3) Facilitated Communication [FC]
All 3 led to massive abuse.
Great article from @AsheSchow. I lived thru the 'Satanic Panic' of the 1980's/early 1990's asking myself "Has eveyrbody lost their GODDAMN MINDS?!"
For three years I have wanted to write an article on moral panics. I have collected anecdotes and similarities between today\u2019s moral panic and those of the past - particularly the Satanic Panic of the 80s.
— Ashe Schow (@AsheSchow) September 29, 2018
This is my finished product: https://t.co/otcM1uuUDk
1) Satanic Panic - satanism in the day cares ahhhh!
2) "Repressed memory" syndrome
3) Facilitated Communication [FC]
All 3 led to massive abuse.
People WANTED TO BELIEVE it worked, so they did.
"I believe the children!" - no matter how absurd the stories got.
"I believe the therapy!" - I just remembered my dad killed 20 people!, etc.
But a delusion is a delusion. Humoring people has limits.
I'd ask people to be smarter and far more skeptical, but I know I'd be wasting my time if I did that.
https://t.co/chxOwMofy5
this court case resulted in one of the FIRST attempts to scientifically verify whether FC was actually real or not.
Ponder that.
It was already being used in many schools by that time.
Even with this evidence, many parents refused to believe FC wasn't real.
As you can see from the video, like the McMartin/Little Rascals cases, FC ended up with people facing CRIMINAL CHARGES.
Now watch this part, which points out most of the students aren't even LOOKING at the Keyboard while typing:
https://t.co/uJ15ugs0gZ
That's your first sign. BACK AWAY. TAKE ANOTHER LOOK. Put your skeptic cap on.
More from Brian Cates
THIS.
Russia hasn't been a willing partner in this treaty for almost 3 decades. We should have ended the pretense long ago.
Naturally, Rand Paul is telling anyone who will listen to him that Trump is making a HUGE MISTAKE here.
Rand is just like his dad, Ron. 100% isolationist.
They've never grasped that 100% isolationist is not 'America First' when you examine it. It really means 'America Alone'.
The consistent grousing of pursuing military alliances with allies - like Trump is doing now with Saudi Arabia.
So of course Rand has also spent the last 2 days loudly calling for Trump to kill the arms deal with Saudi Arabia and end our alliance with them.
What Obama was engineering with his foreign policy was de facto isolationism: pull all the troops out of the ME, abandon the region to Iranian control as a client state of Russia.
Obama wasn't building an alliance with Iran; he was facilitating abandoning the ME to Iran.
Obama wouldn't even leave behind a token security force, so of course what happened was the rise of ISIS. He also pumped billions of dollars into the Iranian coffers, which the Mullah's used to fund destabilizing activity [wars/terrorism] & criminal enterprises all over the globe
Russia hasn't been a willing partner in this treaty for almost 3 decades. We should have ended the pretense long ago.
Naturally, Rand Paul is telling anyone who will listen to him that Trump is making a HUGE MISTAKE here.
Arms control agreements are good when you have willing partners. Lightens the load on our military.
— John Noonan (@noonanjo) October 20, 2018
Russia hasnt been a willing partner in years. There will be gnashing of teeth from people who do arms control advocacy full time, but this is right movehttps://t.co/WmQE43ERCB
Rand is just like his dad, Ron. 100% isolationist.
They've never grasped that 100% isolationist is not 'America First' when you examine it. It really means 'America Alone'.
The consistent grousing of pursuing military alliances with allies - like Trump is doing now with Saudi Arabia.
So of course Rand has also spent the last 2 days loudly calling for Trump to kill the arms deal with Saudi Arabia and end our alliance with them.
What Obama was engineering with his foreign policy was de facto isolationism: pull all the troops out of the ME, abandon the region to Iranian control as a client state of Russia.
Obama wasn't building an alliance with Iran; he was facilitating abandoning the ME to Iran.
Obama wouldn't even leave behind a token security force, so of course what happened was the rise of ISIS. He also pumped billions of dollars into the Iranian coffers, which the Mullah's used to fund destabilizing activity [wars/terrorism] & criminal enterprises all over the globe
More from Culture
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
This thread examining a detrans story puts me in mind of something that shocked me to the core fifteen years ago in early 2004. I’ve not often told this so there follows a mini thread of my own.
This time in 2004 was very sensitive. Our little team at Press for Change was carefully helping to support the government to get the Gender Recognition Bill through its parliamentary stages. It had already started in the Lords and faced a committee stage with evangelical-backed..
..opposition facing the government’s Bill minister Lord Filkin and and others from all parties supporting him. The heavy lifting of daily liaison work was handled on our side by my colleague Claire @2legged whose back room lobby efforts should never go unacknowledged in any..
..account of events. Our political backdrop was a small but determined effort by two evangelical groups touting very familiar lies about trans people and, perhaps more worrying, a couple of contemporary journalists (one a Guardian staffer and one a freelance) determined to tout..
..detransition scare stories as a way to perhaps cast doubt over formalising a legal recognition process. The thing that was obvious at the time was that their stories relied on constant recycling of the same 10-12 case stories, which they had discovered because they were the..
Found a podcast by Keira Bell talking about her reasons for detransitioning
— Lux \U0001f3f3\ufe0f\u200d\U0001f308 (@Lux_fae) February 2, 2021
Listened to it so you don't have to
Wherein, at the 24-30 min mark, keira talks about her reasons for detransition and admits she did it for her ideology alone.
Thread:
This time in 2004 was very sensitive. Our little team at Press for Change was carefully helping to support the government to get the Gender Recognition Bill through its parliamentary stages. It had already started in the Lords and faced a committee stage with evangelical-backed..
..opposition facing the government’s Bill minister Lord Filkin and and others from all parties supporting him. The heavy lifting of daily liaison work was handled on our side by my colleague Claire @2legged whose back room lobby efforts should never go unacknowledged in any..
..account of events. Our political backdrop was a small but determined effort by two evangelical groups touting very familiar lies about trans people and, perhaps more worrying, a couple of contemporary journalists (one a Guardian staffer and one a freelance) determined to tout..
..detransition scare stories as a way to perhaps cast doubt over formalising a legal recognition process. The thing that was obvious at the time was that their stories relied on constant recycling of the same 10-12 case stories, which they had discovered because they were the..
