[This item grew as a footnote to another post, but kinda grew larger than I intended and really does have enough meat to be a standalone item.]
Quantum Sardonics & The Stanford Prison Experiment
Information is colluding again.
Reviewing this madness, this is shaping as yet another example of what I call quantum sardonics, where the sub-atomic universe conspires to bring otherwise unrelated data into bizarre synchronicity that can drive some folks insane. Serendipitous coincidences, providing you are not bat-shit insane to begin with, can be fascinating things, often giving new insights and understanding of the world around us. Science itself is full of such stories of ideas spontaneously generating via unrelated events colluding. Failing to maintain objectivity about it is probably the root cause of what we know as mysticism, and quietly collating and ruminating on these coincidences and understanding how they may reflect elsewhere is what I like to call wisdom.
So it is quantum sardonics at play here as, on the tail of the Watson/Skepchick circus, we find that just this week it is also the 40th anniversary of the Stanford Prison Experiment. The experiment was fascinating in that it showed how quickly what we consider to be humanity vapourises in social bubbles where artificial division is imposed, all regular inhibitions are removed and one side is given authoritarian carte blanche and immunity from accountability or consequence, while the other is marginalised and stripped of all powers of protest or defense.
This miasma of victim feminism1 / slave morality that Watson et al. are peddling, rather successfully, coupled with the almost universally obsequious response to it, are all part of a much wider, though much subtler, revisitation of the Stanford Prison Experiment that has been running, at my guess, since the ’80s – without anyone actually realising it, and in fact only the coincidence of the anniversary has made me notice how similar it all is. Just automagically, the social experimentation we have been conducting chasing some mythical utopianism, with the very best of intentions, has pretty much mirrored the experiment and the findings at Stanford 40 years ago without ever meaning to or understanding that, inadvertently, very similar laboratory conditions had been allowed to manifest.
The ecosystem is an idealised state governed by slave morality, and it is important to note that this state can only be entered into by the participants voluntarily. This is not a state that can be imposed where a will resists it. The guards here are the oppressed, the Watson/Skepchick crowd. The prisoners are, of course, the oppressors – all of those already arbitrarily branded misogynists and sexists for refusing to acknowledge that the state of slave morality has any merit. To begin with, all it takes to be a prisoner is a penis and denial that the slave condition is valid. This is why Dawkins’ offense was perceived to be so great – using allegory, he requested that the slave stop being a slave, as they need not be in that state, that it is a self-created and self-imposed state, and that, really, it is nauseating to behold.
The dynamic of the experiment, and its results, otherwise plays out in a carbon copy to that at Stanford –
- The guards, free from oversight, reason, criticism or restraint, and in the knowledge that no absurdity, no matter how extreme, will ever be questioned, lurch from one accusatory, crescendoing excess to the next in their efforts to slander, vilify and debase their prison population – free from all inhibition, shame or accountability.
- The prison population, in response, produces its usual proportion of those that seek mercy through submission (PZ, Gollum2 etc.), at the price of denouncing other fellow prisoners (Dawkins etc.), seeking favoured trusty status.
- Prisoners that refuse to submit and have the temerity to speak back to the guards are singled out for special punishment – placed in stocks in the town square for general public derision and humiliation (Dawkins again).
- Of course, there will also be guards that decry the corruption and degeneracy of their fellow guards – they get branded and degraded to prisoner status for being collaborators and traitors (currently, Paula Kirby as mention in Watson’s video and any other woman that speaks up).
Of course, I don’t seriously expect any of the fem-bot Watson groupies (both male and female) to do anything other than dismiss this observation with the usual contempt. I, however, find it to be a pretty convincing display of real life mirroring what went on at Stanford, albeit not quite as spectacularly.
This is how our reality is now being malformed into a perverted yin-yang of perpetual accusation and perpetual guilt by the Watsons of this world – a true, pitch black, nihilistic void from which nothing positive can ever emerge. It is as suffocating a moral idiocy as anything the religious have ever been able to come up with.
If there is to be a second Great Enlightenment, the battle will be as much against the poison of these “new”, new atheists as against any established political and theistic dogmas. As it is, our movements are being flushed down the toilet, with the well intentioned assistance of folks like PZ.
Yes, there is a crisis – and it’s not what most folks think.
1 – The arch-heretic first responsible for this concept is probably Christina Hoff Sommers, who is curious by omission from all of the noise to date (it’s probably on the grounds of making too much sense).
2 – “Gollum”, or Phil Plait. Coined by a character called CK, so ask him. I like it. “We mussst be nice, preciousss, yesss nice. Not assholesss, oh noes… must never be assholesss my preciousss, we are nice, yesssss…”
July 17, 2011 at 2:46 am
My compliments to CK for the Gollum Plait pairing. I was always a little fond of Gollum (more like Frodo than like Samwise in my understanding of him I guess), and self-identify a bit with him, but still the comparison is slitheringly recognizable.
And thanks for the info about Sommers. Another case where it’s a relief to find that someone exists whose views don’t just inevitably set me against even hearing what they have to say to start with.
July 17, 2011 at 4:10 am
Bravo.
“Weeees must protect the precious…. yesssssssssss. Master is good to us. Master loves us!”
July 17, 2011 at 6:22 am
I totally agree with this excellent post.
July 17, 2011 at 6:41 am
There is nothing like self-destruction, such as this Watson B.S. is unleashing, to blow up a movement with maximum efficiency. All that is left to do for christianists and assorted reactionaries is just to sit, watch, and greatly enjoy the proceedings, as their perceived enemy does their work for them, in ways that are far more effective than anyone else could conceive and implement from the “outside”.
July 17, 2011 at 11:22 am
Stop reading my mind Raimondo.
July 17, 2011 at 12:52 pm
🙂
July 17, 2011 at 12:58 pm
As I mentioned somewhere here already, the sadistic laughter and gloating from the conservative theist sphere has already begun –
http://theothermccain.com/2011/07/07/rebecca-watson-stop-sexualizing-me/
Pretty much fait accompli.
July 17, 2011 at 11:14 am
If I may use a cliche, Richard Dawkins essentially said “We have bigger fish to fry.” He was spot on, as he so often is.
What Rebecca Watson did was to announce to the world “I’m not a (cheap) whore.” Why thank-you Miss Watson for that revelation, may we now continue with our mission to save schoolchildren from religious child abuse?” She was addressing her fellow WOMEN in the audience and blogosphere, not the men she so clearly despises. Food for thought.
Watson’s behavior reminds me of the scene in Brian De Palma’s Scarface, where cocaine-sniffing high-society girl Michelle Pfeiffer turns up her nose and refuses to get into Al Pacino’s leopard-skin upholstered Cadillac.
We can all only hope that her privileged position doesn’t continue infecting her judgement, or else her next unsuspecting male elevator companion may get the full Tony Montana treatment:
“Say hello to my little friend!”
July 17, 2011 at 11:48 am
Watson is a child that doesn’t know what it wants* throwing protracted a tantrum because it knows its the only way it can maintain attention. The inconsistency and ideological incoherence is further captured here –
“Women who describe themselves as feminist are probably more likely to be confidant and assertive, which is damned sexy… what makes a feminist such a great lay?”
I’m confused Becky – do you or do you not want to be viewed as sexual creatures? Make up your fucking mind. You can’t have it both ways.
As I have pointed out before, this nonsense is a roulette wheel. There is no way of predicting anything, and anything any guy can say is subject to randomly shifting goal posts and can get interpreted as either misogyny or “wow! you do get it!” depending entirely on mood, moon cycle and oestrogen. These are the jailers at whose mercy we exist.
[* – actually, I am running out of options to deny that she does know precisely what she wants – this “atheist misogyny” meme is a business model and it works. Several years ago when this nonsense commenced, even I was not this cynical about it. But I think Becky is on a good thing and she’s milking it. She probably is deranged enough to believe it too – but hey, that’s just a bonus. Having a job you love.]
July 18, 2011 at 12:34 am
One of the Watson-defenders was saying that guys often pressure women into sex by manipulating the desire to be viewed as openminded (something like that) or non-judgmental about guys’ appearance, nerdiness, etc and Elevator-guy must have been doing this. (Did he say anything to that effect? Is the guy that powerful that he can be so oppressive without saying a word??)
My reaction: only guys do this?? I remember one of my guy friends saying how tired he was of being called close-minded, bigoted, sexist, fat-phobic, etc, for being attracted to a certain type of woman. I am not included in that type of women either, but physical attraction is not politically correct, and this is why it should never be.
July 18, 2011 at 1:04 am
sbc, where to begin? I suggest the earlier blog entries here. I guess the question you should be posing to Watson is are women really that stupid, frail, naive etc.? No one knows what the elevator guy said or did, and we never will. We don’t even know there was an elevator guy, if we are actually going to be skeptics, and not just talk about being skeptics. When you start actually digging through all of this, as detailed here, Watson has turned this atheist misogyny fear meme into a virtual industrial production line single-handedly. Her efforts are so staggeringly enormous that it is difficult to believe one person could spread so much terror. But she has. Flick back through the preceding articles. At the end of the day, no man can ever demean women to anywhere near the extent that Watson does.
July 17, 2011 at 7:54 pm
There is some blog spam where you err on the side of caution and just junk it because you have a gut feeling it’s not quite appropriate – like f’rinstance Viagra spam sent to child abuse posts. Very rarely though, you do get stuff that is almost relevant and is worth making a note of. Like –
http://boycottamericanwomen.blogspot.com/
I junked the actual comment because this asshole from 117.201.104.166 using sancharnet.in in Bangalore wanted to sell me an Indian wife as well (yes sunshine, your ISP has been notified) and kinda pushed the friendship.
That site is worth glancing at (it isn’t trying to sell you anything or push malware) because it’s a pretty good (if penis enhanced) equivalent to the kind of pro-Watson gibberish currently infesting blog land and Youtube, and really, isn’t that much more deranged than how Watson babbles herself.
This kind of crap, ultimately, is one of Watson’s love children. You’re achieving sooooo much for gender relations Becky. I’d kiss you, but you’d probably charge me with rape.
July 18, 2011 at 3:10 pm
OH HOW CUTE! POOR WITTLE BABY IS UPSET BECAUSE MEN ARE BOYCOTTING HER! BWAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!
July 18, 2011 at 4:14 pm
This comment retained for the purposes of dismissing any accusations that imply I somehow think chicks have the monopoly on stupid. You can send feedback direct to John here – it must be a functioning email. He keeps coming back. He also wants you to buy an Indian wife.
July 19, 2011 at 9:12 am
John Rambo? Lovely. How endearing. How finely articulate and eloquent.
July 19, 2011 at 10:14 am
Wow. I just found this post. Isn’t it amazing what the voice of a white woman can produce?I mean, black feminist blogs talk about this issue all the time, and only the white girls get the attention! White girls who have never been raped, mind you, or otherwise molested, or even had to walk alone down a city street–they are always accompanied by white female privilege panderers.
I wrote about this issue, and touched briefly on Watson, but I didn’t want to give it tooooo much time–G-d knows those white women don’t deserve it.
http://pornalysis.wordpress.com/2011/07/13/inspiring-white-females-to-action-rationalization-of-late-term-post-partum-white-female-privilege-abjection-and-feminist-cowardice/
July 19, 2011 at 10:51 am
Well, for a start, many black chicks officially divorce themselves by self-labeling as womanists – originally a theistic movement, but rapidly secularising. I love this line, “The monolithic woman is our true enemy.”
What you are pointing out is in fact an identified phenomenon – laissez faire racism. Watson style uber-feminism, to paraphrase Churchill, is a hypocrisy wrapped in a nonsense inside bat-shit insanity. Holding up a mirror and applying the same lofty standards to themselves would probably be fatal.
July 20, 2011 at 12:20 pm
This episode has poisoned the atheist movement for no truly good reason, other than the self-promotion of one person and the righteousness of those who follow her like lemmings. It’s a troubling example of how even a group of people with the best skeptical/freethinking intentions and credentials can fall prey to the same old ploys of intolerance, given the “right” set of circumstances and characters.
Dawkins has not made a peep since the thing started. Coyne is staying silent, acting as if this bit of nuclear waste had never been put out there to poison everyone. And P.Z., when he still mentions any of this, it’s only to reiterate how right he feels about the position he took and has nothing to add.
The consequences will be with us for a long time. I normally hesitate to use language with religious references, but this looks like an old-fashioned schism-in-the-making. And I THOUGHT we were not followers of some “set of right beliefs”.
Intolerance and gullibility (P.Z.), manipulation (Watson) and lack of guts (Dawkins? Coyne?) all around. No one of influence is standing up to the B.S.; no one is letting the chips fall where they may. As if putting one’s head in the sand or smiling in the face of this crap will make it go away — and we’ll all just be pals all over again. Dream on.
How fucking depressing.
July 20, 2011 at 11:57 am
Fatal wouldn’t be a bad thing, per se….
And thanks for the new word re: womanists.
I think what that division is about is third wave whites against first wave blacks–what’s that word I need here about different revolutions in different phases of revolution..?
But, yeah, G-d is still very much a factor of Af-Am culture and politics. We need to give them a chance to raise a little hell in G-ds name, commit some genocide, and before they secularize and socialize the definitions they use to define themselves.
July 22, 2011 at 5:38 pm
[…] Amusing/Depressing Footnote 2 – PZ as Prison Trusty => here […]
July 27, 2011 at 1:12 pm
Franc: I have noticed you over at ERV.
Now I know why I remeber your name! I think we need to re-tool the dialogue, and change the definition. They get away with what they do cuz they kind of got ‘us’ by the balls with rape stats.
I wrote this piece to directly confront the false assumption underlying their dialectic.
Maybe you can give me some feedback on it, but my basic theory is this: if men are all prone to rape, based on our biology( we both know that is bs) then women are prone to molest(rape) children, based on their biology.
Here is the argument: http://pornalysis.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/are-all-women-potentially-pedophiles-greg-laden%E2%80%99s-theory-of-evolutionary-biology-predicts-that-they-are/
August 1, 2011 at 1:20 pm
I recently read or heard somewhere that the incident of male-rape may exceed that of female-rape in the USA at least, as a consequence of the very high incarceration rate of males.
If it actually meant enough to me, I would track it down.
But it is only of peripheral importance to the issue of PZ starting a new irrational tyranny or cult, with the machiavellian ego-on-legs Watson playing the role of Lysenko.
August 3, 2011 at 12:18 pm
Have you been following the rape statistics about men being raped in the Congo? 22% of men report being raped–sometimes for years!!
http://pornalysis.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/289/
September 24, 2011 at 2:14 pm
stories of child abuse…
[…]The Watson Circus and Reflections On The Stanford Prison Experiment « grey lining[…]…
October 20, 2011 at 11:58 pm
feminism…
[…]The Watson Circus and Reflections On The Stanford Prison Experiment « grey lining[…]…
November 3, 2012 at 9:19 am
Its more than just Rebecca and her crew. The experiment is going on across the internet people are given power to say/do things and never be held accountable. That’s why we see the crazy shit otherwise rational people will do constantly do/say only on the net.