Letters to the Editor
-
Oops
I said Unit 516 & I meant Unit 731. That should lose you your lunch.
-
"Right, because feminists have no interest in human rights, peace, suffering or ethics."
I'd say that with NARAL's support of Joe Lieberman and Lincoln Chafee that's a pretty accurate statement.
I also would point out that while NOW in the 70s supported joint custody of children, NOW is now constantly supporting sole custody of children AND opposed to a rebuttable presumption of joint custody of children, thereby depriving children of fathers and fathers of children, though many many studies show that children need their fathers.
So yes, I think it's true that modern feminists have many interests and interests in human rights, peace, suffering and ethics are not always first and foremost in their minds.
I also want to thank you for godwinning the thread. Yes, today's scientists are like Hitler and Josef Mengele. And today's scientists do engage in Tuskegee experiments.
And in fact, what came from Mengele and Tuskegee?
Scientists actively discussing what to do with Mengele's research, how ethical it was to use his results. Ethics boards to discuss informed choice wrt Tuskegee. Experiment approval committees at universities that examine every human and animal experiment to ensure that the subjects are treated humanely and ethically.
Today we have the Atomic Scientists, Physicians with Borders, the FAS, many many scientific ethics boards and organizations, including non-profits, government run, united nations run.
Will scientific misconduct occur? Yes. But is it in anyway reasonable to smear all scientists with that? Absolutely not. No more than it was fair for me to smear all feminists as non-caring in human rights and suffering just because NOW is a bunch of dipshits.
Also, thanks for nothing for accusing me of saying that prisoner experimentation was acceptable. I of course said nothing like that.
What is the current Tuskegee or Mengele that Carol is venting her spleen over?
Between Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, torture, privacy violations, environmental destruction, Carol doesn't have enough modern day examples of people not standing up to authority?
This was yet another cheap and easy cartoon from Carol Lay.
-
No one seems to have mentioned
the Milgram Study; I think this strips parallels it more than the other experiments mentioned.
Here's stuff about it.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
-
No one has mentioned
this is a rerun.
-
I'm usually a fan, but...
This cartoon is just muddled. If it's not principally meant to be science-bashing, why begin by saying that "Finally, the scientists could experiment freely with humans"? That "finally" (plus the happy smile on the brain-poking scientist's face, and "preyed" in the third panel) clearly assumes that scientists would be eager to try out every sick experiment one could think of, if only the rest of society would stop minding. If it's about obedience to authority, why not base the cartoon on the real-life Milgram or Zimbardo experiments instead of imagining fictional, sociopathically cruel scientists? If we're supposed to think about Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib or CIA black sites or some other real-world issue, shouldn't there at least be a teeny hint in that direction?