Holy cow. I don’t understand humans. I have to remind myself that the randomness that allows for cruelty is also the well from which incredible people are drawn.
Speaking of cows, have you seen them get slaughtered? They get scared and even sob and cry because they know their death is imminent. Not to mention being raised in cages and all that. I eat beef all the time, I mentioned that because it is remarkably common for humans to be cruel to animals and even justify it away.
The important lesson I've learned myself is while it is easy to be shocked by the cruelty of others, don't think that given the right motivation you too won't do similar things.
The whole darwinian "less evolved" and "sub-human" labels given to minorities in the US and european colonies for example is the entire society coming up with reasoning that allows for their pre-determined cruelty. In some places, animals experienced much less cruelty than human children.
Evil is the default setting for people, especially when a competition over a resource is involved. good is something we have to be taught and disciplined into.
> They get scared and even sob and cry because they know their death is imminent.
Citation needed, beyond you being overly dramatic?
I’ve seen cows get slaughtered and I’m mostly vegetarian (let’s call it meat-light). What’s remarkably common is humans inventing stories to drive their agenda.
I don’t know why you’re really bringing up this point, especially like this, beyond trying to get into flame bait territory…
> Citation needed, beyond you being overly dramatic?
Firsthand experience lol. Perhaps slaughterhouses medicate them in a commercial setting? No idea.
I brought up the point because we do it anyways despite the fear and terror in those creatures so we can get a tasty meal.
I don't really want to look up videos of animals getting slaughtered but there are places where you can buy the animal and slaughter it yourself. Go ahead and try it and see for yourself. For me, not just their panic cry but as the knife cuts through the throat they scream+gargle through the blood. Hard to get that image out of my head.
But like I said, I eat meat, I am not better than anyone in that regard.
Historically and even in current times, killing without shedding blood or without cutting thrhough the neck and beheading the animal is considered improper, taboo or defiling it in many cultures. What you said about commercial slaughterhouses is probably true, I've heard they wring chicken necks to break them as well. The problem with that is , it feels like you are slaughtering after killing as opposed to slaughtering as part of killing. I don't really know the specifics more than what people have told me but it is hugely frowned upon to not spill blood right away. May have something to do with how ritual animal sacrifice in many cultures required the animal's blood to be spilled into something and the blood of an already dead animal is not ok?
Keep in mind, modern animal killing has to be "humane" as in be acceptable to people who never get close enough to see that stuff. Similar to capital punishment I suppose.
The concept of an honorable/respectful killing is strange to modern western minds who only care about minimizing pain as a measure of cruelty.
Had the university released this any other time of year, more students on campus would be talking about it, maybe doing demonstrations, calling for more action on this and other wrongs, etc.
Maybe a student-run newspaper/outlet will do a big feature in early Fall.
This doesn't seem like a major thing to get upset over. Prisoners agreed to do this, were compensated for it, and suffered no harm. It's not like the prisoners were experimented on without their consent and were harmed from the experiments.
I think they still had a choice even though they were imprisoned. However, their circumstances (and maybe the lure of compensation) might have affected their judgment. This is why some stuff becomes illegal. People can still agree voluntarily to do it even if there are negative consequences.
This is the same reasoning as to why an inmate cannot meaningfully consent to sex with guards/admin. They may very well be making a rational choice that in any other circumstance would be fine, but its too easy to abuse and would be impossible to properly implement.
I don't see any reference to why this research was being done. The mosquito and pesticide studies seem likely to be DoD/CIA related since they fit neatly in the pattern of other unethical testing we know they were doing. The named researchers were also mentored by someone who did dioxin (Agent Orange) and drug experiments on prisoners for the DoD.
Imo, to apologize for something that you didn't actually do is an empty, and quite frankly offensive gesture. It is blatant pandering.
I've never been experimented on against my will, but if I was, and 60 years later some kid fresh out of college decided to "apologize" for the brutality that other people carried out against me... uh, can you be any more tone deaf?
> What would you have liked to see them do differently or what actions would you have liked to see rather than an apology? (If anything)
It's been 60 years, and now the organization makes an apology when it's fashionable? You can't just commit human atrocities and then say "Oh, sorry about all the atrocities."
Apologies are not at all appropriate when it comes to human atrocities.
Seriously, think about it: if someone committed murder and then apologized to the family for taking their loved one away from this world forever... do you think the family would really want that apology? Or would it be just a slap in the face?
To expound upon my point, when groups of people commit human atrocities, they don't deserve to just "apologize". We do not accept your apology, and you should be ashamed of yourself for even trying. Their organization committed an atrocity, and they have the gall to come out and "apologize"? What are they sorry about exactly? That the world knows what they've done? Yeah, I'm sure they're really sorry about that.
The pandering is itself offensive, especially if the act is performative. Issuing an apology without holding anyone to account, or offering some means of restitution may very easily be interpreted as nothing but empty words.
I am reminded of the trend of inserting land acknowledgement statements at the beginning of speeches and group activities. It panders to a group of people who approve of such things, without making a meaningful or genuine gesture. It is basically another way of saying "hey everyone, this guy over here got screwed. Anyway, let's not bother with changing the status quo, I've got more interesting things to talk about..."
Wikipedia article of the researcher [0]. UC SF investigated the research in the 2022 and the researcher apologized, saying:
> [While] the work I did with colleagues at CMF was considered by many to be appropriate by the standards of the day, [in retrospect] those standards were clearly evolving. I obviously would not work under those circumstances today... I have sincere remorse in relationship to these efforts some decades ago."
30 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 79.5 ms ] threadThe important lesson I've learned myself is while it is easy to be shocked by the cruelty of others, don't think that given the right motivation you too won't do similar things.
The whole darwinian "less evolved" and "sub-human" labels given to minorities in the US and european colonies for example is the entire society coming up with reasoning that allows for their pre-determined cruelty. In some places, animals experienced much less cruelty than human children.
Evil is the default setting for people, especially when a competition over a resource is involved. good is something we have to be taught and disciplined into.
Citation needed, beyond you being overly dramatic?
I’ve seen cows get slaughtered and I’m mostly vegetarian (let’s call it meat-light). What’s remarkably common is humans inventing stories to drive their agenda.
I don’t know why you’re really bringing up this point, especially like this, beyond trying to get into flame bait territory…
Firsthand experience lol. Perhaps slaughterhouses medicate them in a commercial setting? No idea.
I brought up the point because we do it anyways despite the fear and terror in those creatures so we can get a tasty meal.
I don't really want to look up videos of animals getting slaughtered but there are places where you can buy the animal and slaughter it yourself. Go ahead and try it and see for yourself. For me, not just their panic cry but as the knife cuts through the throat they scream+gargle through the blood. Hard to get that image out of my head.
But like I said, I eat meat, I am not better than anyone in that regard.
Keep in mind, modern animal killing has to be "humane" as in be acceptable to people who never get close enough to see that stuff. Similar to capital punishment I suppose.
The concept of an honorable/respectful killing is strange to modern western minds who only care about minimizing pain as a measure of cruelty.
Maybe a student-run newspaper/outlet will do a big feature in early Fall.
I've never been experimented on against my will, but if I was, and 60 years later some kid fresh out of college decided to "apologize" for the brutality that other people carried out against me... uh, can you be any more tone deaf?
One of the experimenters is still at the university according to the article.
What would you have liked to see them do differently or what actions would you have liked to see rather than an apology? (If anything)
It's been 60 years, and now the organization makes an apology when it's fashionable? You can't just commit human atrocities and then say "Oh, sorry about all the atrocities."
Apologies are not at all appropriate when it comes to human atrocities.
Seriously, think about it: if someone committed murder and then apologized to the family for taking their loved one away from this world forever... do you think the family would really want that apology? Or would it be just a slap in the face?
I am reminded of the trend of inserting land acknowledgement statements at the beginning of speeches and group activities. It panders to a group of people who approve of such things, without making a meaningful or genuine gesture. It is basically another way of saying "hey everyone, this guy over here got screwed. Anyway, let's not bother with changing the status quo, I've got more interesting things to talk about..."
> [While] the work I did with colleagues at CMF was considered by many to be appropriate by the standards of the day, [in retrospect] those standards were clearly evolving. I obviously would not work under those circumstances today... I have sincere remorse in relationship to these efforts some decades ago."
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Maibach#:~:text=a%20wor...
https://lawblogs.uc.edu/ihrlr/2021/05/28/not-just-ice-forced....