So the victim would have half-raped herself? Still not working for you, dude.
-
-
Replying to @espiers @erikcorry
Scott never published his real name on his blog, he merely made it possible to find it with some sleuthing. Lots of SSC readers never knew his name, because they didn't do so. The ability to find his name with sleuthing was never Scott's concern. 1/3
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
His main concern was that patients could find his real name and his secondary concern was that crazy people could easily find it. 2/3
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
now, why would scott alexander siskind not want his patients to find that he used their cases for general entertainment of his blog readers? that's somewhat a mystery to my, but perhaps you have some insight here…
2 replies 1 retweet 69 likes -
It is fully consistent with APA guidelines to publish anonymized cases. If you have information that he didn't do so, you should report him to APA. But surely you are just a troll.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @_amtiskaw and
It's not about whether he committed a formal APA violation, it's about whether his patients might have been offended if they'd known the way he talked about patients on his blog, and if they'd have had a right to know about him doing so before going to him for treatment
3 replies 2 retweets 99 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
yeah when you put it like this, "do siskind's Black patients have a right to know that he thinks they are genetically inferior" seems like a pretty straightforward question to answer
4 replies 6 retweets 80 likes -
Replying to @perdricof @arthur_affect and
Does he believe they are genetically inferior? I've followed a few links people have presented as proof and I've yet to find anything of the sorts What I have found is the opposite
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @VierDrey @perdricof and
There are a couple things "the opposite" could mean: 1) Black people are genetically *superior* to white people 2) Eugenics is total bunk, and none of the important traits that people think of as "superior" or "inferior" can be mapped to genetic causes in any predictable way
2 replies 1 retweet 17 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @VierDrey and
I see no evidence Scott believes either one 2) is what I think, and Scott is very clearly, at best, skeptical to this point of view -- and the community he surrounds himself with is actively and viciously hostile to it ("blank slatism", etc.)
2 replies 1 retweet 6 likes
He obviously does not believe "the opposite" -- my best guess is he believes a softened version of it ("Black people are like 1.5 standard deviations below white people on average in the g-factor and this tragically explains most racialized social dysfunction")
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @VierDrey and
He comes very very close to saying this multiple times but "taboos" actually directly bringing race into it -- but, in the end, so what
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @perdricof and
Ooh, "very close" Definite proof that one
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.