File: 1746962661556.jpg (49.13 KB, 542x502, 450a9976b01f92986cfbe46e57b567…)
No. 2520159
General Conspiracy Thread.
Do you have somewhat schizophrenic beliefs that worry your friends and family? Tired of getting red-texted for "tinfoiling" about recent events around the globe? If so, you've come to the right place.
Discussions surrounding government cover-ups, entertainment industry secrets, odd predictions, political intrigues, etc., are all welcome here.
Please follow all /ot/ board rules. Don't start petty infights, and remember to report bait instead of responding.
Previous threads:
#1
>>>/ot/369313#2
>>>/ot/490893#3
>>>/ot/636795#4
>>>/ot/849990#5
>>>/ot/935591#6
>>>/ot/1028419 #7
>>>/ot/1028464#8
>>>/ot/1068732#9
>>>/ot/1147862#10
>>>/ot/1190469#11
>>>/ot/1240193#12
>>>/ot/1330198#13
>>>/ot/1417052#14
>>>/ot/1478839#15
>>>/ot/1571083#16
>>>/ot/1616325#17
>>>/ot/1712160#18
>>>/ot/1876599#19
>>>/ot/2023344#20
>>>/ot/2085806#21
>>>/ot/2177582#22
>>>/ot/2255446#23
>>>/ot/2416922 No. 2520193
File: 1746967362977.gif (612.68 KB, 500x463, Tinfoil 24.gif)
Thoughts?
No. 2520587
File: 1746984962656.jpg (164.16 KB, 421x318, 1000019736.jpg)
No. 2520762
>>2518900It's not so simple as you paint it, either. I don't know what part of
>Its publication in 1997 was well received in Russia; it has had significant influence within the Russian military, police forces, and foreign policy elites,[1][2] and has been used as a textbook in the Academy of the General Staff of the Russian military.Makes it some big coincidence to you that a lot of things happening right now regarding Russia and its influence is going along as it was written in Foundations of Geopolitics. But nah, it's just plain western xenophobia, nothing to see here. No dots to connect, pay no attention to the world around you. As if things are so black and white. I don't have anything against the average Russian citizen, it's the governments around the world that are fucked up and obsessed with power plays and land wars at the expense of regular people.
No. 2521486
File: 1747063016708.jpg (38.38 KB, 679x251, 1000019901.jpg)
The government committing biological warfare against the population never ends.
No. 2521734
>>2521526It's discussed in both the sources I provided there.
>One of his six recommendations was: The leaflet should have, if possible, the picture of a beautiful woman, after the method used by the Germans in the First World War. This device would insure that the soldier would be attracted and would be unable to resist looking at the picture over and over again. This would rouse his passion, and his heart would be inclined for love and to hate fighting.It's been mentioned in some documentaries I've seen and stuff too but mostly it's just referenced in WWII-era sources. Doesn't necessarily mean Germany was not conservative - remember, they were propagandizing their military ENEMIES with pornography, not their own side. Producing pornography to demoralize enemy soldiers is in line with a conservative culture.
No. 2523305
File: 1747221944155.webp (141.41 KB, 1200x960, TB1027061.webp)
I remember having a very vivid religious dream when I was like 5, which was kinda weird for a kid from a not particularly religious family. In this dream I was also sleeping, and I awakened because it smelt like sulfur and because of smoke that filled my room, and when I looked around there was a horned, devil/demon-like creature standing by my bed. After initial shock, I was not afraid of it and I started grinning at it, showing it that I'm not afraid, it looked surprised, and at that moment a beam of light appeared from the ceiling. The creature got afraid and disappeared, and a powerful voice that came from that light told me that I will always be protected no matter what. And I kinda felt like it throughout my life, despite my many fucks ups, and despite having shitty abusive family and no good patterns of behavior form them and being alone most of my life, something was always there to bail me out in the end, and the only time when I wanted to commit suicide and I prepared all the stuff to do it and was about to start, my teacher randomly called me (it was almost midnight) and he asked me what I was doing, he told me he got a "feeling" that he had to call me and tell me that everything is going to be all right in the end, and he said he wanted to see me in the class the next day. Later I felt like it was my guardian angel telling him to call me. (btw my teacher was gay so there wasn't anything sketchy about our relationship). I'm also very good at "feeling" people, despite not being good at communicating with them, and I can immediately spot a narc. God gave me autism in exchange because otherwise my powers would be too powerful probably kek. But yeah, I do believe something is out there guarding me (I don't know why though since I'm such a retard) and it's a weird feeling. I wonder if there's anyone else here who felt that way
No. 2528709
How do I navigate the endless shitty articles about certain conspiracy theories to find the good stuff? There are so many middle aged american men writing blogs about nonsense.
>>2528212Yeah but who will take the fall after Diddy? Who's next?
No. 2528959
File: 1747668501346.jpg (27.47 KB, 358x400, 1000021174.jpg)
Maybe I'm just schizophrenic but sometimes I'll see posts that read like blackpills disguised as venting, like the kinds of superficial problems men think women care about.
>i don't have big boob! my friend has big boob. no moid like me. moid only like big boob. there is NO POINT IN LIVING if you're small boob
No. 2530676
>>2528959Moids write fiction like this on reddit all the time but I actually think it's also very common for women to be insecure about minor issues like breast size because of how brainwashed we are practically from birth to compare ourselves (negatively) to other women and to beauty standards. I would generally assume someone saying this is just an insecure/brainwashed woman unless it's somewhere like Reddit where 85% of the user base is moids who like to make up fictional stories for fictional internet money.
>>2530503I have similar thoughts when I hear stories like this but I don't know. I would like to think even most pro-lifers would find the story horrifying, because the pro-lifers I know are all very happy to say there should be exceptions carved out for the woman's health and rape. But then again the pro-lifers I know are almost all women, and I wouldn't put it past moids to pass laws like this just to wage a war on women. There is a huge push for transhumanism in medicine and politics right now though (on both the right and the left, too - Elon and Thiel are the 'right wing' side of the Rationalist/transhumanist tech dystopia circles but there are many left-wingers in those circles too). And what they all have in common is they love weird experimental reproductive technology, AI, bionics, etc.
No. 2532840
File: 1747934421270.jpg (145.66 KB, 928x696, 1000001336.jpg)
Majority of skyscrapers are empty and attempt to give the appearance of a thriving and populated city
No. 2533859
>>2524837I have a theory that true crime and horror movies are deliberately pushed to help break down society.
Most people I know who consume true crime slop are extremely paranoid and mistrustful because they think everyone they meet is the next Jeffrey Dahmer and going to torture and kill them.
I think it's intentionally designed to break down trust and cohesion within communities and make everyone depressed, paranoid and misanthropic.
No. 2533943
File: 1748014332500.png (75.43 KB, 1024x1024, 1000001340.png)
The only "great transfer of wealth" is going to nursing homes to pay for fox news and stale bread and CNAs on EBT that get paid 10 an hour but staying there costs 50-90k a month. At some point we need to just euthanize everyone over 80
No. 2534005
>>2533856Hela cells are so creepy, but not in a spooky way just that it feels like it's something that shouldn't exist and yet it does. It also defies what most people believe about tumors or how cells work. Same with that one canine viral tumor that carries the cells of a dog from god knows how long ago and it's still capable of existing even now. It's almost like cellural immortality.
>>2533859Some time ago I was almost obsessed with true crime and horror content, I would watch every video coming out from major creators and I would want to know about several cases. After a while I realized that listening to that shit made me miserable, like I would often think about crimes and all the horrible things that happened and I hated it. It took some time and effort for me to conciously avoid these things and I can tell I'm better mentally. Sometimes I still fall into the rabbit hole of true crime and bodycam footages and it ruins my day. It's worrying that so many people happily consume true crime content, they can't tell it poisons them.
No. 2534034
>>2534022Most antinatalists aren't women, though. It's misanthropic depressed dudes, like the guy who carbombed an IVF clinic and killed 4 randos not even associated with it. America also isn't the whole of humanity. Again, any living antinatalist is the counter argument to their own claims, as they wouldn't choose to continue living if they actually believed what they said.
>>2534005That canine viral tumor is the only genetic legacy of North America's domestic dog population, too. Very creepy and yet fascinating.
No. 2534073
>>2533231You don't even understand what antinatalism is if you ask people who are ALREADY alive why they aren't killing themselves kek
And as a gnostic I find antinatalism very based. Many gnostics were antinatalist.
No. 2534079
File: 1748021613528.png (33.9 KB, 666x450, you_look_just_like_einstein.pn…)
>>2534076>redditReddit is a useful source of spiritual information anon. Every neckbeard knows that
No. 2534084
File: 1748021825227.jpg (28.15 KB, 402x402, too_bad_so_sad.jpg)
>>2534082Nta but yes it is a reddit thing or the spiritual conclusion every moid comes to, before or after buddism. And sometimes islam, when shit gets really bad
No. 2534110
>>2534076The demiurge has a strong hold on you,
nonnie. Don't let that false god steer you away from the true path to enlightenment. YHVH is not your friend.
No. 2534125
>>2534005>>2533859true crime just exposes the hatred of men in current society. Would you prefer women to be dumb and naive about what happens to them?
>>2533865we already live in a low trust shithole
No. 2534187
File: 1748028938048.jpg (103.03 KB, 768x768, 1000001344.jpg)
Why is American parenting so consoomery? First it starts with loads of supplements and medications for small babies, a lot of times without even testing the babies mineral levels, then having higher weight standards to push formula, then diaper companies funding studies claiming delayed potty training is better, then loads of "necessary" stuff like parents being told to only by organic high end baby products, fear mongering about baby bottles and such, breastfeeding women told they need to pump after each feed even when EBF. Telling parents they need to be rear facing until 6-10 yr old, sterilizing machines and air purifiers, vaccines galore, then in school they HAVE to be in every sport and such, hoarding books and tablets and everything else, then when teen hood rolls around you have to get expensive dresses for dances and limos and college coaches and everything else
No. 2534219
>>2534187They want their consumers started early. Even in the baby thread on /g/ there's women who are convinced that a baby isn't supposed to fart or have loose stools sometimes so they need to spend $400 a month on lactose free formula instead of just accepting that babies are in the middle of learning how to digest and poop. But no, it's lactose intolerance even though every single mammal on the planet can digest lactose because that's kind of the whole thing with mammals.
Even for stuff that's supposed to be less consumptive like cloth diapers has people with 100 all in ones and crazy huge stashes. Each of those things costs like $15-20 each, like what the fuck. And they're all plastic anyway.
You would not believe the reaction I got during pregnancy when I was like "I'm not taking a prenatal, I'm just taking methylfolate and my normal vitamins". Like nooo I need to buy a less good prenatal and I need to take unisom and I need to take zofran and I need to take xyz. Like holy fuck it's unreal.
No. 2534324
>>2534219While I agree it's consoomery, they typically don't put babies on lactose free formula unless it's constant, months on end of diarrhea to the point of the baby getting dehydrated and needing IV fluids. I highly doubt it was just a couple of weird poops, also trying to tell parents who have babies with digestive issues that they're just hypochondriacs is super harmful when there's in insane amount of documented cases of this
>even though every single mammal on the planet can digest lactose because that's kind of the whole thing with mammals.There's actually been similar issues documented in apes. I think it was a rhesus monkey (?) that had to receive soy. That being said, humans can be born with all kinds of fuck shit that most animals don't have, humans have more cases of pre e, more need for emergency c sections, more cases of digestive issues like NEC, hell there's even a condition that babies intestines can just randomly turn itself inside out, it's completely believable that enzymes in baby humans can get messed up and have trouble digesting breast milk
No. 2534335
File: 1748039127045.jpg (16.13 KB, 261x193, 1000001345.jpg)
>>2534223Americans, typically millennial parents, like having a dick measuring contest with how much of a "safe and science based parent" they are. They'll give actual meth to their kids without questioning it if studies say so. They'll fight for days about how so and so rear faces until 4 but this mom rear faces until 6 because shes a super duper safe smart mom unlike every other mom who follows the correct guidelines for car seats which is typically to front face around 2, but everyone who doesn't follow that is a baby murderer.
Enfamil in particular (who makes the most supplements for babies) realized they lose money because of breastfeeding women so funded a bunch of studies claiming babies aren't getting enough iron or vitamin d from breast milk, and then funded even more for unrealistic weight standards for breastfed babies
"Crunchy" moms are constantly under fire, I suspect as a psyop sent from a lot of baby and kids corporations due to the fact if enough moms become crunchy they can basically shut down majority of companies geared to force parents to consoom, typically pushing worst case scenario crunchy moms which is zero vaccines at all, homeschooling strictly with zero qualifications, "homemade" baby formula in the instance that the baby can't consume breast milk, letting your baby or yourself die before getting a c section or hospital birth, not even taking Tylenol, etc when in reality most crunchy moms really aren't that extreme and typically just avoid plastics, eat organic, avoid screens, use cloth diapers, etc
No. 2534339
File: 1748039533497.png (551.18 KB, 1080x1695, 1000001346.png)
>>2534219It happens to animals in nature with high levels of lactose in their milk, typically cows, as the rhesus macaque monkeys were mentioned too because they have the highest level of lactose in the animal kingdom, it happens in foals as well
https://horsesport.com/magazine/nutrition/lactose-intolerance/Sometimes the animal will receive special formula, a lot of the times if it's a farm animal they won't really do much because their lives aren't as valued as humans unfortunately. You can actually buy soy formulas from farm stores. If there's other animals with lower levels of lactose in their milk (like jerseys, goats, camels, etc) the farmer will give the baby that milk
>t. literal farmer No. 2534440
>>2534034>Most antinatalists aren't womenNot true. Almost half of women of this generation are going to be childfree by choice. Most childless men are childfree not by choice but because no woman wants to have their kid.
Men in general are extremely pro natalist because their entire drive in life is to force a woman into giving birth to his spawn. That's why there's so much hatred for childfree women, because every woman who refuses to carry a scrote's spawn is an existential threat to the moid and his 'legacy'.
Anti-natalist moids are just a very loud minority.
No. 2534520
>>2534470What are you even smoking? Thinking deeply doesn't mean you have to turn into a retarded misanthrope who hates humanity kek.
>>2534472No, plenty of moids are Malthusians kek. More so than women anyway. Most types of death cults are followed mainly by moids since moids are prone to death cult bullshit. Every antinatalist I have ever met in my life (a lot of people) has been male.
No. 2537547
File: 1748287544567.png (470.23 KB, 627x787, Screenshot 2025-05-26 at 20.24…)
elites really like virginity taking and dont mind even when the person isnt a teenager anymore. i wonder if its a form of loosh harvesting.
also i bet the hollywood moid is dicaprio.
No. 2537703
The reason trannyism attracts such depraved, awful and disgusting people is because it's an anti-society subculture that purposely appeals to lowlifes who need attention and want to act out, just like Satanism was for kids back in the 80s and 90s.
Trannyism is seen as an edgy and subversive inversion of the divine order of everything. The opposite of good is bad, the opposite of above is below, the opposite of man is a woman etc. So it naturally attracts these contrarian, unpleasant edgelords and lolcows, because trannies are basically Diabolist satanists in their worldview. Just like how satanism was a fad for people who felt angry and rejected by society, trannyism has replaced that as the new fad.
There’s a reason satanists were traditionally very pro homo, tranny and pedo, because those things were seen as the inversion of the status quo, and satanism gave them a religious/philosophical standing to hide behind to justify their naturally creepy moid tendencies. Theistic satanism basically, like with the crosses turned upside down.
TL;DR: trannyism is just the new satanism for angsty kids and contrarian adults
No. 2537710
File: 1748295137355.png (46.04 KB, 1280x1280, Pentagram4.svg.png)
on the topic of satanism, are there any nonas here who genuinely practice satanism? i'd be interested to hear about your experiences with it, and why you practice it, without judgment.
No. 2538166
>>2537716the common theme with all trans people (especially moids) is they feel rejected, wrong, and want to rebel against society.
they know that they are seen as outcasts and freaks and they revel in this rep. they dont actually want mainstream acceptance or a trans majority, because that would take away their angsty little
victim cult mentality. they need to feel like they're part of a special little club.
women and tifs generally show these kinds of emotions and anger less because females are told not to be unreasonable or disagreeable. but theres a reason tims have a reputation for being insane and violent.
No. 2538594
File: 1748356651220.png (86.91 KB, 659x354, Screenshot_20250527_083608.png)
>>2538223How about all the women dying in Texas because hospitals "don't know" what a medical emergency is in order to deliver abortions? I know everyone is rightfully angry about the anti abortion law in that state, but I'm just as gobsmacked that multiple hospitals are just letting women die of sepsis because they're not sure if that counts as a medical emergency. Like, really? All the coverage I've seen has glossed this over, but these hospitals should not escape scrutiny just because the abortion laws are worse. Doctors get the rope too. "Oh I don't wanna save your life because I might have to justify treating SEPSIS by emptying your uterus of your dead, rotting fetus. You dying is more convenient for me."
No. 2539140
File: 1748388697243.jpg (605.31 KB, 1080x1821, 1000024663.jpg)
Hot take: Picrel was done on purpose.
>https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/27/health/genetic-mutation-sperm-donor-scli-intlWhy is there a reason for ANY sperm donor to impregnate more than several women?? Even if the sperm were perfect, fathering 67 kids all not knowing who each other are carries a risk for inbreeding down the line without their knowledge.
Women have the right to know if the sperm they selected has 1. Been screened for fucking mutations and 2. How many other women have been impregnated by their sperm donor choice.
Put it this way, think of how many regulations there are for blood and plasma donations and yet fertility clinics somehow get carte blanche to do whatever the fuck they want to with women who enter their facilities under pretense that it's safe and professional!
Now there are kids with cancer mutations everywhere, and even if they don't get cancer, they carry the mutation so that if they decide to have children they could get cancer too. This is so devastating, like being raped, and the outrage is not nearly enough. Reminds me how the US government lied about giving STDs and sterilizations to "undesirable" populaces back in the day just so they could observe the outcomes. Well, here a facility lied about giving women cancer babies so the government gets to again watch what the consequences of this shit move to give kids genetic cancers are. Despicable.
No. 2539162
>>2539140I feel like the article just glossed over this
>Unlike in some cases of serial sperm donors, such as a Dutch man who was ordered to stop donating sperm after being found to have fathered between 500 and 600 children around the worldWhat kind of sick fetish is this?
No. 2541569
>>2537650'Antinatalist' literally means that you think nobody should be allowed to have children, and you want the human race to die out. Not wanting to have children yourself is not the same thing. I know plenty of childfree women but no female 'antinatalists' because antinatalism is a misanthropic death cult where people get off on the idea of ending humanity and also want an excuse to hate pregnant women and mothers. I have never wanted children but I don't get upset by the idea of other people wanting or having children, it's their own risk to take, and I don't view it as political but rather a personal decision. The reason people think antinatalist is synonymous with anti-family is because it by definition is.
>>2537733There's no such thing as an actually normal trans person.
>>2538223Lol this happened to me but not in the context of anything pregnancy-related. I had to find out 1.5 years later from a fucking nutritionist that my male endocrinologist lied to me about my abnormal blood work being 'totally normal' kek. Medicine seems so sadistic toward women and seemingly always has been, especially when the doctors are male.
>>2540199I don't believe this about advanced LLMs, as someone with both theoretical background in a similar field and friends who worked/work on the 'cutting edge' of LLMs. The theoretical ideas for LLMs existed back in the 70s/80s (and were public knowledge) but the size of servers required to run them weren't built until recently, also most 'advanced' LLMs are just the result of AI trainers (people) not the software itself being particularly good, and these jobs just popped up recently. They really aren't that interesting or advanced a technology anyway, it's a fairly dumb technology that just convinces people it can do more than it actually can do because a lot of people these days are functionally illiterate and easily impressed.
No. 2541706
>>2541569I really want to commend you for your effort there in responding to the user who thinks childfree (a personal decision about your own life) is the same as antinatalism (an anti-life philosophy). It's really bordering on bait at this point, being that stubbornly obtuse about what's being written. Same as misunderstanding the statement "most antinatalists are male" which is not the same as "most males are antinatalists". When reading comprehension failures happen at this scale, it makes me question whether the person is actually retarded or just trying to start an infight. I have low hopes that the message will sink in, but thanks for your time.
>>2541630This is why I appreciate platforms like MyChart where you can read your own stuff. I always read my after visit report and the labs.
No. 2541763
>>2541706Lol nonna thanks, I have been frustrated reading this exchange too but I'm leaning toward it not being bait, just bad reading comprehension and a low level of understanding of what these words actually mean. I think a lot of people are just so politically polarized right now they don't look into what these philosophies are and assume that there are only two possibilities: being some kind of 'have 15 children' trad or being an antinatalist. The reality is that most people throughout time have been somewhere in the middle.
>This is why I appreciate platforms like MyChart where you can read your own stuff. I always read my after visit report and the labs.I don't think that exists in my country. When my labs are ordered by my GP I can access the results on my GP's clinic platform but when they're ordered by a specialist I can't see them unless the specialist shows them to me, and in the case of the endocrinologist in question he didn't print them out for me because he told me everything was totally normal. My health got dramatically worse for over a year before I even found out my labs had been abnormal (at which point I had them re-done and the disease progression was much worse already) and I ended up having to see another specialist to get diagnosed with PCOS and hypothyroidism once a lot of damage had already been done. All the specialists and GP I have seen since then have been female, and female providers can suck too but I still think they are way less sadistic and evil than male providers are toward women on average. The worst part of this is that I am highly educated in a biomed adjacent field and my endocrinologist knew that, even telling me on my discharge appointment 'I'll probably see you at a conference sometime soon,' so he was lying through his teeth knowing that I'm not too stupid to correctly interpret my test results if I had actually been told what they were.
No. 2541855
>>2541837>>2541817my mother is one of the strongest most selfless people i know—but that does not mean her choice to have a child was not inherently selfish. i adore my life and i think there is so much wonder in the world, but not as much as there is suffering. if i chose to have a child that would benefit only what i want in that moment—not the child. i want to care for the beings that are on earth presently, not bring anymore. there is much to correct and too much horror. i’m sorry you still feel i hate mothers, and even my own, that is not true. i wish i could have a child, but not only for personal worries (finances, if the father left or hurt them, etc.) but just too much chaos and suffering that is all. i stand by my point that having a child is a selfish decision, not that the person is overall selfish or “bad,” but that there is much to be corrected and cared for in this world currently. children are bright, innocent beings—so many already exist and suffer. i just don’t think it is a good place for them to be, just so we can have more families and feel nice to care for something that is our own.
No. 2541893
>>2541862absolutely agree with your latter point
nonnie but that is where they and i differ; not intending to sound like i stand on some moral high ground, but my choice/perspective is more grounded in how it affects the life of the individual (child), not due to solipsism/a desire to hoard resources and benefit my life. there are also many people in the world who reproduce for their own benefit (outside of them wanting a family/something to care for, im speaking in terms of utilizing them for sexual pleasure or financial gain [men]) so i think it goes both ways unfortunately.
also kek the anon you replied to above was not me.
No. 2541945
>>2541938
You're literally in the tinfoil thread nonna. I mean 'illuminati' is just one word I could have picked, I'm not going to die by it or anything but the reality is that moids extremely invested in controlling humanity (who are usually caught up in unsavoury shit like breeding farms etc. a la Epstein) will openly say they want to 'limit world suffering' and 'save the planet' by making women reproduce less, often by force. I did not insinuate the worst evil people would not have children, I insinuated the worst evil people want to control and reduce the global population and want OTHER PEOPLE not to be able to have children (they themselves, of course, want to have as many as possible). The philosophical idea of 'antinatalism' was started by these exact evil rapist moids. Rape and forcing women to have children is the exact same amount of evil, more or less, as forcing women not to have children via various eugenics strategies, which is what the people who invented 'antinatalist' philosophies have always done in the past and continue to admit they want to do.
I never said women calling mothers selfish are just as evil as those moids, I said they derived their philosophy of 'antinatalism,' most likely unknowingly, from the philosophy of those same moids, and should reconsider it. This shouldn't be difficult to understand. No one's evil just for holding a misguided opinion or having an ideology I disagree with, but they should do some research and think about it some more imo if they don't know who started the ideology and why.
>the men that want women to have no babies, which are a tiny minority
Yeah just a tiny minority of the world's most powerful and influential men. And you better believe those men don't hold themselves and their own wives to the same standard.
>in any case people will never, ever stop having children
Then what's the point of antinatalism as a philosophy anyway? I don't see the point in philosophies where the main goal of the philosophy is literally impossible.
>womens' rights are at real threat at being done away with because of natalism
Huh? WTF are you even talking about? Women have far fewer children in most wealthy/first world countries than at any earlier point in recorded history (which is overall good imo but isn't antinatalist in origin), I don't think there is any real threat from 'natalism' in the countries 95% of lolcow users live in.
No. 2541957
>>2541945wanted to make a better response so I deleted but then I read this through and realized it's useless.
>Rape and forcing women to have children is the exact same amount of evil, more or less, as forcing women not to have children via various eugenics strategiesis easily among the most terrifying and evil rhetorics I've ever seen. you have no way of gauging why an individual does not have a child. most people don't have a child just because they see parent hate, their reasoning is usually complex and not tunnelvisioned, so the fact you think it's as bad as rape is appalling and even then comparing what essentially are thought crimes to rape is vile. well, in any case at least my first instinct about you was correct. also the fact you claim powerful men are antinatalists is objectively wrong because Elon Musk is a natalist, among other ones.
No. 2541967
>>2541957No, I don't know why people choose not to have children, and it's fine as long as they're choosing it and not forced or sterilized. The fact you think it's 'terrifying' to be against eugenics is in and of itself fairly concerning. I didn't say 'choosing not to have a child' is bad, I said moids using eugenics to force women not to is bad, and the types of men who invented antinatalist philosophy were eugenicists. Seriously people in this thread need to learn how to read.
Elon Musk is one exception to the norm and is also not (afaik) from one of the very old world-controlling powerful families, he just got lucky with a couple businesses.
Let me reframe this to make it clearer: By your own admission 'you have no way of gauging why an individual does not have a child' so presumably you realize you have no way of gauging why an individual DOES have a child either. Why do you think it is morally correct to force an individual woman not to have a child? By what moral right can you make this decision for her (something you yourself admit is a personal decision that can hinge on a huge number of unknown factors or reasons)? Why would it be morally correct for you to decide that you can and should decide whether or not she is allowed to have the baby?
No. 2541973
>>2541957also one of the main ways this is applicable is when, say, women were forcibly sterilized, such as has happened with some ingenuous populations, which yes is truly evil, more comparable to a violation like rape than basic antinatalist talking points, and absolutely was sanctioned by some powerful men. however eugenics isn't the exact same as true end-humanity type antinatalism. there's some overlap but generally those men wanted more of the people they wanted to have children.
>>2541967>forcewhat do you mean by this in regards to modern society, rather than the above example I gave which actually fulfills this criteria? why are you thinking random people's opinion = forcing someone? and why is it that you're talking about whether or not I'm the one deciding it? because I am not, isn't it the evil lizardmen overlords making those decisions for her?
No. 2541983
>>2541973I'm saying that the main proponents of antinatalism in modernity (those that have popularized the modern antinatalist philosophy) are eugenicists, I don't know what's confusing about this. You can easily google forced sterilization practices in the West if you're interested. Then realize that the people promoting those practices were and are in large part the same people promoting modern antinatalist philosophy. And understand why the modern uptick in antinatalism is suspicious.
Again, if you think that people won't stop having children and can't be stopped, what is the point or purpose in espousing an antinatalist philosophy? It's only a useful philosophy if it can lead to results. Otherwise it is just posturing and navel-gazing.
No. 2542056
>>2542030
I don't have a 'special interest' I just kept seeing dumb infights in the thread from bad reading comprehension where people were conflating childfree women with antinatalists and found it annoying. This is also the tinfoil thread so I thought it was on topic to point out that one of the most widespread conspiracy ideologies in the world right now, espoused by a majority of the world's most powerful people, is an antinatalist/eugenicist extreme population reduction ideology. I myself was taught in school as a child as a part of the curriculum that it is evil and destroying the world to have children. So much so that I had to spend years deprogramming myself from this innate hostility toward parents once I realized where that ideology was coming from and what purpose it serves for the world's elites.
You literally asked me what I mean by force, so I told you to look up all the Western eugenics programs, many of which have been documented even in the 2010s and more recently. You implied that there are no eugenics programs in modern society, when there, in fact, are - especially in the global south but also even in wealthy nations. I think you mean 'wary' not weary but I too feel wary whenever there is a sudden inexplicable uptick in extreme, anti-nature and anti-freedom ideologies and it's tiresome to hear people conflating personal choices with extreme ideologies. You don't have to be part of an extreme ideology to choose to have a child or not to have a child and constantly shitting on mothers, calling them selfish and evil, etc. accomplishes nothing but making life marginally worse for women and possibly guilting some exceptionally conscientious women who would have made actually good parents into choosing not to have children that they wanted to have, while thoughtless and selfish parents continue to have them.
No. 2542118
File: 1748581919355.png (20.14 KB, 1192x121, huh.png)
>>2542056>grouping anti-nature with anti-freedom as if they're conflicting is one another>admits to wanting the people you prefer to procreate and people you see as undesirables doing so is actually a problem, you're just sneakier and less evil about pushing it funny how things come full circle like this. it really makes me wonder what podcasts you listen to our what politicians you support in general. I actually do hope they're not what I assume, but there's always some doubt.
No. 2543130
>>2541881>the 'antinatalist' philosophical position is one pushed by those exact evil rapists moidsthis is not true at all. the illuminati and pedo cult moids want abortion banned so more women keep pushing out unwanted babies that go straight into the came home system and they can abduct and rape them and turn them into child sex slaves. same reason they want the third world kept poor and backwards so they have an endless supply of thirdie kids to rape.
theyre also the moids who love and worship crispr and IVF and gene editing because they want to farm child sex slaves in personal breeding clinics, just like epstein did.
No. 2543185
>>2542695How does this belong in the tinfoil thread? This is just you being mad about something. Take it to the vent thread.
>>2543117Pretty intense strawman you've made up there. You would be happier if you stopped making up people to be mad at.
No. 2543198
>>2543117I'm talking about men and eugenics. And of course that's the issue, this is men we're talking about.
Women being eugenicists is an ability we all possess when looking for a potential partner to have children with. We've been psyop'd into thinking it's wrong to seek out men with good standings, healthy features and family lines, etc. But that's literally what female animals do in the wild, especially birds with sexual dimorphism
No. 2543228
>>2543198Eugenics by women (aka reproductive choice) is normal, natural, our birthright as the females of the species, and how you maintain a healthy species. The 'eugenics' that is
problematic is usually rich and powerful moids who seek control over societies by controlling the reproduction of women instead of allowing women to freely choose their own reproduction. They can do this all sorts of ways, by sterilizing groups of 'undesirable' women or finding ways to insidiously affect their fertility, mandating shit like one-child policies (thereby encouraging/rewarding female infanticide), establishing breeding/IVF farms Epstein or Brave New World style, or if you go back far enough the good old fashioned way was for wealthy/powerful moids to hoard women and kill the children women had with other men (this isn't really the modern notion of eugenics but it's related because it comes from the same basic moid impulses). I'm confused why some women in the thread are conflating the two when they are opposite forces.
I think some anons are also getting confused because certain technocrat moids sperg about 'birthrates' and seem to want to reproduce their own genes with IVF and other reproductive technologies, but first of all this doesn't really make them the opposite of 'antinatalists' (since many of the same moids are skirting the line of being antinatalists/are part of the very same groups who encourage antinatalism in the general populace while wanting to be able to breed their own bloodlines as much as they want, by force if necessary, with the women they choose), and second, the moids people are thinking of (like Elon Musk) are not the most powerful people in reality. The popularization of antinatalism in the general populace via propaganda isn't because the people propagandizing actually want all of humanity to die off; propagandists don't operate by telling everyone honestly what they want. Even if you look at actual avowed/self-identified Malthusians (of whom there are many, and in many high places) they don't want all of humanity to be gone, they want most of humanity to die off leaving only a group of the stupidest and most easily controlled people as slaves while they themselves breed within their own bloodlines (which they consider superior) as much as they like and have their pick of women to breed with. But one of the many ways to achieve this aim without too much violence is to convince all of the more intelligent, responsible, and wealthy-ish women who otherwise would have wanted children to voluntarily stop reproducing themselves with the partners they would willingly choose, which makes the population easier to control. Of course not all women would willingly reproduce, but some would so it helps to brainwash them into thinking having children is 'morally wrong' and that it's selfish and harmful to willingly do so. Other strategies will be (and already are) employed to control the reproduction of other population groups, like secret sterilization. All these various insidious patriarchal psyops are a way of trying to cheat nature and reverse the natural order by taking reproductive choice away from women.
No. 2543243
>>2542685Kek nonna I have no idea, sometimes I just think zoomers can't read.
>>2542118I don't listen to podcasts or support politicians, your reading comprehension is so bad other anons think you're a bot, your screenshot is unrelated to the discussion and no one said anything about undesirable parents initially but you, yourself and other antinatalist posters who claimed mothers are 'selfish' and have children thoughtlessly and without concern for the child. If you want women to become mothers more thoughtfully and selflessly you shouldn't be discouraging the thoughtful and selfless women who want children from having children with this 'omg bringing children into the world is evil' guilt trip. Wanting potentially good, caring parents to procreate rather than bad,
abusive neglectful parents is not something I will ever apologize for, and I have no intention of being sneaky about it. Yes, that is what I want, for people who become parents to be good parents, and for people who don't care about raising children to not have them.
No. 2543530
>>2543117Humans are definitely becoming uglier. I think anyone with eyes can see that. And no, zoomers wearing 10 inches of makeup and 15 different Chinese filters on tiktok doesnt count.
Not only are people fatter than ever, but everyone's face looks weird as fuck nowadays. My hypothesis is because people nowadays (especially women) select far more for wealth and social status than good looks. Even the most beautiful women are all dating hideous but rich men now, and having ugly babies that look the fathers.
No. 2543539
>>2542695You're getting screeched at by people who intentionally misinterpreted your post to scream about how abortion is the greatest thing ever and how women should practice it willy nilly (literally any woman who's ever had an abortion, even a chemical early stage one, will tell you it's not a fun or easy process, it's actually extremely traumatic and painful, just proves how many zoomer retards/trannies/permavirgins who have never had one are on this board)
The biggest drains on society are by far druggies and alcoholics but it's considered extremely taboo to say anything bad about them, they're always painted as poor little
victims no matter what. 70% of weekend visits to A&E are alcohol related. Go into any emergency ward at any time and I guarantee you at least 1/2 of all the people in there will be in for drugs or alcohol related issues.
Not only are addicts a huge medical drain but they're also antisocial, prone to criminality, usually
abusive and awful people to know in general and ruin all their relationships, friendships, families lives etc etc. You're allowed to screech about evil downies ruining the world as much as you want when in fact it's failed normie substance abusers who are the worst people on the planet, yet nobody is calling for them to all be culled.
No. 2543542
>>2543539Also, people willt try and make excuses for addicts by saying
>well MAYBE one day they will get clean and become functioning members of societyEven though alcoholics and opioid addicts have a 90% relapse rate.
Most addicts are also undiagnosed narcs or bippies. I would much rather people with clusterbee personality disorders, criminals, rapists, pedophiles, shitty
abusive moids and addicts were ejected out of the gene pool than some retards who basically do no harm, but they're never the focus of the topic of eugenics. Level 3 autists are 1000x worse and more challenging to deal with anyway out of all the disabilities, but autism is the one disability that normies think is acceptable, which is ironic. For every 1 savant genius grandmaster autist, there are 1000 AGP brony gooner autists.
No. 2544087
>>2544064This sounds like such an American problem to me, like I know it's increasing in many wealthy countries but I now know a few women who have had babies (several of whom are from Eurocountries) and they all breastfed the normal way and didn't describe having any particular issues other than just the typical having to wake up at night constantly, fatigue, annoyance, etc. but nothing really health-related. Which does make me think that the companies and health professionals browbeating moms about everything they do are largely to blame because it seems like the chiller the culture is about motherhood the fewer of these problems moms seem to have, but I don't know enough young mothers to know that for sure.
I do think the pharmaceutical industry making up problems to treat thing is a real thing though, I even think the widespread shilling of birth control pills was in large part to induce additional health issues in women. No I'm not anti-birth-control but I think hormonal birth control is not the ideal form of birth control and definitely shouldn't be shilled to teens for acne or whatever considering all the issues it causes. I had a friend who worked for a health economics company where pretty much their entire job was trying to look in the medical literature for random rare conditions that could potentially be treated by existing on-patent drugs and then generating journal articles suggesting that the government should fund tests for the drugs for those conditions (never the condition the drugs were initially developed for).
No. 2544211
File: 1748713431239.jpg (686.01 KB, 1189x1598, 1000015095.jpg)
>>2544087Don't get me started on bc. Im so against it I would almost call myself anti-bc. Its shilled SO HARD and sold as if its the only form of birth control you should be partaking in. The promotion is so deep when I say the word bc you know I'm talking about the pill. Meanwhile what's the benefit? Your boyfriend gets to do it raw? It doesnt even protect against stds and you take on the onus of buying it, keeping up with it, and if it fails it's your fault. And I think they fudge the numbers on how effective it is because the ONLY people I know who oppsied a pregnancy were on it. I guess you could say it helps get rid of your period, but its not sold as that at all and I dont know how much the trade off is worth it for most people. I dont understand the benefit over condoms. I used condoms my entire life and never had an issue, plus no STDS, even in marriage I still use them cause theyre so much easier.
I hate the way theyre sold as "empowering too", literally HOW? Even on this site when I said I dont like BC I was told "sure it's got health problems bit pregnancy is worse!" As if I was saying you should just do it raw instead. Wtf. I lump it in with being "empowering" in the same way sex work is, where basically it just means its empowering cause it makes it easier for men. Empowerment is so backwards and co-opted and they'll never stop using it to drag women further into their bs, like when they shilled cigarettes as "empowering" for women to smoke.
No. 2544268
>>2544211>And I think they fudge the numbers on how effective it is because the ONLY people I know who oppsied a pregnancy were on itIt's only as effective as they claim it is when you take it at the exact same time every day, just a 2 hour difference is enough to decrease it's effectiveness. That's where it goes wrong most of the time.
But yeah I agree they prescribe hormonal bc way too easily. It's used as a bandaid solution for a lot of women's issues they don't want to 'waste' more time and resources on.
No. 2544297
>>2544211AYRT and by 'I'm not against birth control' I mean I'm not against contraceptive measures generally. I am largely against the birth control pill except in specific situations where the person taking it has been fully informed of the risks. I was against taking bcp for many years despite doctors pushing it on me for anything and everything, but finally I agreed to try it for a couple months due to severe endometriosis because my doctor did not want to prescribe me pain meds. What followed was basically the complete ruination of my life - I was only on it for 3-4 months but it
triggered latent PCOS that I probably had but wasn't very obvious yet and I did not get my periods back for 2.5 years after I stopped it, I gained over 100lbs in under a year (even after I stopped taking it I kept gaining weight) despite basically starving myself, developed issues with my thyroid and even worse period cramps and pains than I had before. Even after that happened I kept being told by gynecologists that I should just try it again and see if it helps with all the issues it directly caused kek. The worst part is in the end I was just put on those painkillers for endo that I was asking for in the first place but now the rest of my health is ruined. And I wasn't even sexually active when I was taking it, I was single and didn't need birth control for anything. So many of my friends who have taken it have had weird shit happen to them up to and including multiple people developing psychotic episodes that only stopped a few months after they stopped taking the pill.
I agree with you that the people I know who have gotten accidentally pregnant have all been pill users too, no one I know who just uses condoms has had an accidental pregnancy and it's not like those are the only two birth control options either. There are issues with most forms of birth control but I really think the hormone pills should be discouraged for most people unless they are sure they know what they're getting themselves into health-wise (potentially) and have no other options. But a lot of women just associate the pill with reproductive rights generally and if you criticize the pill it means you're some forced-birther freak or anti-abortion or trad or whatever. Also we need to stop thinking that getting rid of your period is generally a good thing. Natural hormonal cycles are important for physical functioning, as unpleasant as periods can be for many women myself included. Things got so much worse for me when I lost my period, the endometriosis pain didn't even stop it just happened all month long instead of a few days a month. The BCP is mostly just used as an excuse to plaster over women's actual health issues even when a woman isn't sexually active.
No. 2544393
>>2544268This. Women aren't properly educated on their conditions. Why are women with PCOS prescribed BC that literally causes PCOS and makes it harder to lose weight?
For conditions like endometriosis, hyperplasia, etc the baffling thing is that they don't even check if the birth control is working. They just "meh it's probably managing your condition, good luck" it's so fucking bizarre
No. 2545842
>>2545831It's 2025, if you live in a country where the pill is legal it's also legal for you to keep your legs closed or, if not, stop letting men raw dog you on a daily basis. I have never experienced this supposedly inescapable problem of 'back to back pregnancies' nor met any woman in my life who has, it sounds like a terrible condition indeed. I wonder what causes it, maybe indiscriminate unprotected sex or some kind of weird fetish?
If you want to please moids so much you don't even ask them to wrap it up, at the expense of your own body and health, go for it. No one's stopping you.
>And the whole medical industry is built upon using the bodies of poor people as guinea pigs, should we take every medicine of the market? Uh typically not without their knowledge, and typically drugs don't pass approvals when they've been shown to be so dangerous/intolerable in a study on patients who didn't even know they were taking them. But you're so right, big pharma should be able to sell anything they want without proper testings and without proper side effect warnings/informed consent from the patients. You're so right permapregnant-chan.
No. 2545850
>>2545842>it's also legal for you to keep your legs closed or, if not, stop letting men raw dog you on a daily basisI don’t fuck men, but there’s a ton of women who do. I’d argue with you that you don’t know shit about history because it was common place for women to have 5+ children but you’re either dude or an edgy black pill teen (who will eventually end up partnering with a male once you get bored of your edgy phase)
>You're so right permapregnant-chan.I bet you’ve got your dick in your hand imaging me getting cream pie
(scrotefoiling) No. 2545859
>>2545850No, I'm an early-mid thirties childless woman kek. I have a boyfriend but this does not mean I have to have unprotected PIV sex with moids or have babies. You sound like you need to go back to school and get a middle school level sex ed course refresher if you think bombing your body with dangerous hormones is the only option to prevent back-to-back pregnancies.
I have plenty of older female relatives and none of them have ever experienced 'back to back pregnancies' either.
>>2545852I do know exactly what I am talking about, actually. The fact you are on the tinfoil thread shilling pharma companies so hard you're covering your ears and telling me to leave the thread when I mention how the first BCP was tested makes me think you're some kind of fed or bot.
>>2545856AYRT and I agree, it is indeed fucked up for that anon to be happy that women are getting hurt by the medical industry because 'women must have unprotected condomless sex with moids at all times or else.'
No. 2545872
>>2545864The anon who has been shitting up the thread shilling for big pharma and claiming that the only way for women to avoid back-to-back pregnancies is to take a medication with an extremely high rate of severe side effects, the only benefit of which is to allow the moid to avoid using protection when he has sex with you (also putting you at high risk of STIs). She is the one saying 'yes, women must let big pharma harm their bodies to please moids' because they will whine and cry if they don't get to stick their dick in without a little piece of rubber covering it. This seems like a problem moids should deal with themselves - there was a birth control pill trialled for them which had similar (actually milder) side effects to the female birth control pill, and it was not approved. Why? The side effect profile was too dangerous/intolerable for the MALE version of the pill to be approved. This isn't even tinfoil shit, it was all over the mainstream news.
I don't know why that anon is getting so incensed at the idea of women having PROTECTED sex, but it kind of sounds like a pharma bot unhappy that women are starting to wake up and deciding to stop harming our bodies for the good of a pharma company and a moid having a 0.1% "better" orgasm.
No. 2545893
>>2545883Kek I'm not the one that started a conversation about how everyone on the thread who's skeptical of harmful big pharma inventions will be 'bred' by men and have 'back to back pregnancies.' If you find that post perfectly fine and not disgusting at all, you should have no issue with me mentioning (gasp! horror!) condoms. You need to be 18 to post here.
>>2545886Women choosing not to take a drug moid pharma execs are trying to force on them isn't 'shilling' anything, it's us exercising our right to bodily autonomy and personal choice. The fact you are so upset about this is, in fact, pretty disturbing.
No. 2545942
File: 1748809796285.png (223.67 KB, 710x774, harvardbcstudies2.png)
1/2 Everyone who thinks there were no initial problems with this drug should read this entire article, here are some good snippets, from
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/9/28/the-bitter-pill/
>After graduating from Harvard Medical School in 1918, he continued to work at Harvard, serving as a Clinical Professor of Gynecology for more than three decades. In 1923, Rock revived the Massachusetts General Hospital’s infertility clinic. The following year, he started a new infertility clinic at what was then the Free Hospital for Women (now part of the Boston Hospital for Women and Brigham and Women’s).>The Free Hospital, a yellow French estate house in Brookline, offered Rock a special advantage: Because it was a teaching hospital, Harvard-associated physicians had increased access to patients there.>Eventually, Rock began testing combinations of synthetic hormones on his low-income patients, a strategy he and Pincus would return to again and again in later research.>Rock had encountered artificial versions of estrogen and progesterone—the hormones that maintain the lining of the uterus—through his work on a national committee. He believed that the compounds might “develop” his infertile patient’s dysfunctional reproductive systems. The dosages were dangerously high—many orders of magnitude above what women take today. However, they appeared to have the desired effect: 13 of the 80 previously infertile patients became pregnant after the tests ended. His colleagues called this phenomenon “the Rock Rebound.”>The following year, the two researchers would begin a much larger trial on 60 patients from the Free Hospital and outlying clinics with the goal of determining the effect of progesterone on the menstrual cycle. Many of the women who did not become pregnant via rebound were disappointed by the compound’s misleading side effects, which mimicked the symptoms of pregnancy. Half of the women dropped the trial.>Unhappy with the results, Pincus learned an important lesson: He would need to take more drastic and less ethical steps to achieve the degree of experimental control needed to understand the compound’s anti-ovulatory effect.>Meanwhile, Rock had set his sights on the overpopulation issue. Over the following years, the goal of curbing population growth—especially among people he saw as inferior—would become a way of reconciling his contraception work with his Catholicism, and a rationalization for working on nonconsenting subjects. “People like to have babies. And this is particularly so among primitive peoples.” Rock said in a WGBH interview a decade later. No. 2545947
File: 1748810004335.png (232.69 KB, 699x866, harvardbcstudies4.png)
2/2
>As the side effects of the pill became more clear, Pincus failed to acknowledge their gravity. He told the New York Times many years later, “These side-effects are largely psychogenic. Most of them happen because women expect them.” Pincus would repeat this message over and over again in the years to come.
>When he exported his methods to Puerto Rico a few short years later, even his collaborators grew unsettled by his carelessness. During the large-scale clinical trials, the G.D. Searle Corporation medical director sent a cautionary note to Pincus’s partner, John Rock: “We here have long been disturbed by the casualness with which materials pass from Pincus’s animals to your patients.”
>But the development of birth control—and other wonder drugs—happened during a relatively unregulated period of scientific history. The Nuremberg Code of 1947, which established the importance of informed consent, was not legally binding. The Kefauver-Harris Drug Amendments of 1962 and the Belmont Report of 1979, which required proof of drug safety and “respect, beneficence, and justice” throughout all human trials, had not yet been written.
>American researchers had no formal obligation to obtain informed consent.
>But explicitly eugenicist legislation also codified forced sterilization. By 1955, 16.5 percent of Puerto Rican women of childbearing age had been sterilized. In a 1988 study of women who had been sterilized at the time, 16 percent reported that they had not made the decision for themselves.
>Many on the island justified these practices. “The tragedy of the situation is that the more intelligent classes voluntarily restrict their birth rate, while the most vicious, most ignorant, and most helpless and hopeless part of the population multiplies with tremendous rapidity,” the governor of Puerto Rico wrote to Margaret Sanger in 1933.
>But, as in the earlier trials, researchers had trouble convincing women to remain on the pill. Participation was arduous: For three months, subjects were made to take one tablet a day for the majority of their menstrual cycle and undergo regular testing. According to letters, social workers and doctors, including Pincus and Rock’s in-country collaborator Edie Rice-Wray, visited the subjects often, collecting vaginal smears on glass slides, recording side effects, and distributing tablets.
>According to Pincus and Rock’s paper, 22 percent of women dropped out due to side effects, which remained severe.
>Ten years after its first release, the birth control pill made headlines again during the Nelson Pill Hearings, a Capitol Hill investigation into the pill’s safety. When feminist activists noticed that no women were being invited to testify, they interrupted the proceedings and testified from their seats. “Why isn’t there a pill for men?” activist Alice Wolfson shouted. “Why are 10 million women being used as guinea pigs?”
>Neither the physicians nor the protesters mentioned the Puerto Rican trials.
No. 2545997
>>2545988Kek sorry, with the number of people accusing me of saying shit I didn't say earlier and acting like 'not taking the pill gives you back to back pregnancies' was a reasonable take I wasn't sure if you replied to the wrong post or if it was another instance of terrible reading comprehension.
As of 2017-2018 about 12-13% of premenopausal women in the US were on oral contraceptives yet the fertility rate has remained below replacement for the entire chunk of time since roughly 2010, so clearly the other 87-88% of potentially fertile women were all managing pretty well not to have 20 children. Only about 5% of 40+ year old women in the US have 5+ children. Women from age 30-39 in the US currently only have on average 1.3 children, not the 5-15 you'd expect if they were having back-to-back pregnancies every year. I can't believe I'm even typing this out but apparently my obvious sarcasm in this post
>>2545842 wasn't obvious enough for the ex-redditor anons who expect tone indicators, so I'm trying this approach instead.
No. 2546052
File: 1748816417034.jpeg (1.75 MB, 1125x1312, IMG_8993.jpeg)
>Totally not a right wing psyop you guise!!! Completely one hundred percent organic, women taking control of their bodies!!! Peter Theil hew?????
No. 2546061
>>2546058See this post
>>2545947 that clearly explains the earliest 'anti bc movement' was a movement by feminist activists. Just because you spend all your time following random tiktok tradthots doesn't mean everyone does or that there is no reality outside of trad tiktok. Maybe stop poisoning yourself with 'christofascist ideology' intentionally and you will learn to stop splitting. This is an absolutely insane, controlling overreaction to women telling you they don't want to take a drug you want them to take just because you seem to hate the idea of any other woman asking a moid to wear a condom.
No. 2546073
>>2546064Says the person literally calling feminists right wing christofascists who want to remove women from public life for… promoting barrier methods of contraception? Choosing not to take drugs they don't want to take? kek.
>>2546065Are the fascists in the room with us right now? This whole argument started because a schizo accused 3 pro-condom posters of being evil pro-natalist board infiltrators and then started stating outright that women who don't use oral birth control pills will get 'bred' by moids and suffer back to back pregnancies. So yes someone is very mad about condoms.
No. 2546074
File: 1748817462820.jpeg (385.96 KB, 1125x973, IMG_8995.jpeg)
Why do TPTB keep shoving Mormonism down our throats?
No. 2546093
File: 1748818654284.jpeg (136.67 KB, 1125x686, IMG_8996.jpeg)
>>2546086They changed Mormon underwear to be more fitted, like a tank top.
No. 2546113
>>2546102>>2546093Yeah, this tradition
definitely started because some closeted fag had a fetish.
No. 2546389
File: 1748839290763.png (115.65 KB, 808x337, bbcsdefdelf.png)
>>2546380The FDA won't approve male birth control because it has the same symptoms as female birth control and that's not acceptable for moids but it is for women. I'm not even kidding kek, see picrel from
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230216-the-weird-reasons-male-birth-control-pills-are-scorned
>To get to grips with why side effects are so much less acceptable in male contraceptive pills, it helps to go back to when the female combined pill was first developed – the late 1950s. At the time, there were no widely adopted formal standards for clinical trials, and the drug (a relatively high-dose combination of oestrogen and progesterone) was tested in a series of controversial experiments in several countries such as Puerto Rico. There were just 1,500 women involved, and though half the participants dropped out and three died, the drug was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 1960.>Modern versions of the combined contraceptive pill are considered to be safe for most women, though they can lead to high blood pressure and blood clots in rare cases. However, they can also cause a number of less serious side effects, including mood swings, nausea, headaches, and breast tenderness. There's even some evidence that it can change your body shape. (Read more about how the pill changes your body shape.) >Which brings us to the next reason male contraceptive pills are held to a higher set of standards – both in terms of acceptable side effects, and safety more generally: to state the medically obvious, men (except transgender men) can't get pregnant.>"I think you have to think about how ethics committees weigh up risks and benefits in terms of a trial, because although you have a couple involved, it's the female partner who bears the physical risks of a possible pregnancy," says Walker. "Weighed against that, inconvenient side effects are [more] acceptable," she says.So basically their argument is that since women bear the risks of pregnancy, we should also have to bear the risks of contraception, since it's not 'worth it' for men to suffer 'inconveniences' (like death, blood clots, strokes I guess? but also all the actual inconveniences) when they won't die in childbirth anyway. Very good logic! I guess they'd use the same logic when approving procedures like voluntary kidney donation that women often do for their moids… right? Right?
No. 2546404
>>2546381I am almost 100% positive there is widespread access to female condoms, spermicidal foam, diaphragms, etc. in the US in addition to copper IUD (if you can't get them at the drugstore you can get them online for sure). But honestly almost everyone (unless they are married/in a very long term relationship and open to having a baby) should at the very least be using a barrier method, because it protects from STIs which oral contraceptives don't. Condoms (and female condoms, iirc) are more effective (with 'average' use) than oral birth control pills and most of the other methods you mentioned, and almost 0 people use birth control perfectly outside of clinical trials so the 'perfect use' stats for oral birth control can effectively be ignored, while using condoms perfectly is easy with a half hour of sex ed in 9th grade or whenever.
If a condom is not enough protection to make women feel safe it can be combined with spermicidal foam, diaphragms, copper IUD (which comes with its own problems like potential pain, heavy bleeding and damage to the cervix/uterus but I would still consider better than hormonal methods in some cases, like women with pre-existing hormonal conditions) or even mirena/hormonal IUD (can still cause some of the same problems as other hormonal contraception but the doses are lower and hormones are more localized than most other forms so at least in theory the effects are less likely to be systemic/severe although those claims are understudied imo) or even with methods that are not very effective by themselves but should be fairly effective combined with a condom, like fertility tracking (with a wide abstinence window) or even pull-out if you trust the moid.
One of my personal biggest concerns though isn't even oral contraceptives as birth control, it's the sheer force with which doctors will try to prescribe it for anything and everything women/young girls (including barely pubescent girls) suffer from, even if they are not sexually active. It is considered a first-line treatment for acne, for endometriosis, for PCOS, for painful period cramps, PMDD, dysmenorrhea, and even issues as non-severe as irregular periods in the teen years or Being An Athlete Who Finds Periods Inconvenient. Sure, the birth control pill may be a trade-off that's worth making if the alternative is the risk of an ectopic pregnancy, but the calculus changes if you're giving yourself high blood pressure/blood clots because of some mild teenage acne or a disorder like PCOS which is actually
triggered/worsened by the pill. Personally I had birth control aggressively pushed on me by at least a dozen doctors, at least 50-60 separate times between the ages of 13 and 30, and a lot of the time they would not take no for an answer. I was even told repeatedly that I would literally die if I refused to take hormonal birth control by my gynecologist - she only admitted it was a lie later and didn't explain why it was so important to her that I take it instead of other options that she knew were available. I had to spend over 20 minutes fighting with her until she offered to prescribe me the safer alternative. Maybe the women that got on the pill young and stayed on it don't know how aggressive doctors are about it because they've been on it the whole time, but if you're not on it they act like a pack of rabid dogs that will not leave you alone until you finally do what they want and it is honestly disturbing. I even had doctors threaten me by implying that I could get raped so I should take it anyway when I told them I was celibate and not interested.
No. 2546452
>>2546429Yeah when I was like 13 or 14 (I got my period when I was 10) I had some super late/irregular periods and when it didn't come for 3 months one time I went to the clinic and was forced to take a pregnancy test in the clinic even though I insisted I was a virgin. OK fair enough they gotta check I guess. Luckily I didn't even have to wait for the result because my period came while I was peeing into the cup and the doctor laughed about it and then told me that it's extremely common for periods to be late/irregular before the age of 16-17 but 'if it bothers me she can put me on the pill which will make me more comfortable.' Thankfully she wasn't pushy about it and my mom was there to be like 'hell no' but that same year I went to a dermatologist for cystic acne and was, again, pressured, heavily this time, to go on bc because 'it's the best treatment for acne.' I checked later and there isn't even much evidence that bc helps with cystic acne, only regular hormonal acne. Those were both when I was still in middle school. At that age it can't possibly because they're so worried about pregnancy because most girls (when I was growing up anyway) had their first sexual experiences between the ages of like 16-18 on average, I don't think they were seriously worried about 13 year olds getting pregnant. I also had a male doctor in high school who told me that me being sexually abstinent doesn't mean I can't get pregnant, because 'sometimes you're just fooling around and sperm flies everywhere and gets in your uterus' or 'you can get pregnant from a swimming pool or toilet seat.' This backfired on me and gave me extreme pregnancy paranoia for years even though I was a virgin to the point I was having crying breakdowns and panic attacks in school and missing classes even though I knew getting pregnant from toilet seats was supposed to be a myth kek, but the doctor put that seed of doubt in my head.
I just think it's messed up especially considering the history of the pill which was moids trying to control female fertility (first, trying to treat infertility and get women pregnant using bc, then trying to use bc for population control or sedation for mentally ill women) that we've now retconned this drug as like the singular best drug in the world that will solve every single female-specific health problem. It was the first FDA approved medication that wasn't for treating an illness but rather for breaking normal biological processes and we now have roughly 3 generations of women who are taught that being out of touch with our reproductive/hormonal cycles and the natural physical changes that come with them, often from a very young age, is completely normal and benign. In that same time frame the incidence of female hormonal diseases like PCOS and endo has shot up exponentially and hardly anyone is looking into the causes, they're just throwing more birth control at the problem. It's also contributed to the normalization of other drugs that basically exist to just try to modify normal health without fixing the root causes of actual diseases (see: the entire psychiatric drug industry for one example, see: the statins controversy) but women were the first guinea pigs and continue to be the main guinea pigs.
I don't want to see these drugs being made illegal because I think they can still be useful to some people but I think there needs to be a thorough informed consent process (including a discussion of alternatives) and they should be very careful prescribing them to any woman under 18 or who hasn't had her menstrual cycle fully 'normalize' yet (like your clots example or my irregular periods example). There are women in their 30s and older who discover they probably had PCOS since they were preteens that they didn't know about because they skipped all their periods for 20 years, finding out it's too late for them to treat it and have kids or undo 100s of lbs of weight gain they didn't know were hormonally caused. Anyway I'm ranting but I just don't get why people are so immediately hostile to any discussion of this, although I suspect in part it's the fact that zoomers seem more resistant to condom use in general which my generation all considered the normal 'default' form of birth control. And also that people have forgotten the history of the pill and how it was used by men to pressure women into casual sex since the sexual revolution. I'm not some ultraprude who thinks no one should be having sex with multiple partners but I think encouraging the attitude of 'well I'm on the pill so casual sex with men I wouldn't trust to put on a condom and wait until I'm out of my ovulation window can't hurt me' in young women isn't a good thing and it's leading to worse STI awareness than millennials had growing up as well.
No. 2550222
>>2544399Because democracy is completely fake and the will of the people doesn't actually make a difference. The entire world can scream 'Free Palestine' and it will have absoltely no effect. Politicians are not scared of their populace, they know they can act with impunity. Blair and Bush starved 500,000 children to death with sanctions over oil deals, and nothing happened to them, they are now retired and living comfily in their mansions with their pipe and slippers and whiskey.
We're ruled by a small class of politicians who in turn are working on behalf of billionaires like the Rothschilds and George Soros. What the public wants is absolutely irrelevant to these people's interests.
No. 2551182
>>2551088Anyone who calls anyone schizo for suspecting the government of being corrupt on the DL is a tinfoil in itself imo. You have to be incredibly naive to believe nothing shady would ever happen in the gov
>>2551157Fraternity for sure. Free Masons? Red shoe Mafia? Or if they just have different ones in different locations
No. 2552173
File: 1749271115734.png (133.92 KB, 2422x308, Screenshot 2025-06-07 at 05.34…)
this shit depresses me. its hard not to go schizo when you realize there are no good guys in power and never has been.
No. 2555136
>>2551182Masons, I haven't heard of the red shoes.. Also shit like $ceintolo Gee, Kabbalah, T M meditation cult, OTO, some public figures were also born into cults like Children of God, there's some ones like Magical Mystery school I haven't looked much into.
I believe most of the masons are high rank: Jesters, Shriners, Scottish rite 32/33rd degree.
Does anyone here know about the hermetic order of the golden dawn? I'd like to look into them
No. 2555458
File: 1749462365648.jpeg (182.46 KB, 1205x905, IMG_0376.jpeg)
>>2555136The red shoes thing is really weird to me and I’d like to learn more about it. Haven’t watched anything on it but I’m assuming it’s a literal metaphor for stepping in children’s blood or something. It’s not the first time I’ve heard of such symbolism. I’ve heard the reason that Masons and Royalty love purple so much was because it represented the blue blood of the royals and the red blood of the common people dying for them being mixed together. Rangers football club had red lines at the top of their black socks and apparently it’s to represent them ‘being up to their knees in Catholic blood’ in reference to the Plantation of Ulster.
No. 2555470
>>2551157I remember years ago in the UK, the government wanted the list of all judges, police officers and politicians who were members of the Masons/secret societies to be made public record. They threw a huge bitchfit over this and claimed it would be breach of privacy, and so the law was scrapped with help from Jack Straw.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1225532/Judges-longer-declare-freemasons-Straw-says.htmlBut it’s well known in the UK that almost all high ranking judges and police chiefs as well as a ton of politicians and Royals are Freemasons. Theyre one big nonce club and that’s why they’re so soft on pedophiles and other sexual criminals in Britain. Why would they want laws that sentence men to life in prison for child rape when they’re all child rapists themselves?
No. 2555473
File: 1749463745356.jpeg (100.5 KB, 380x599, IMG_0377.jpeg)
>>2555470These old pedo Freemason scrotes literally look like Nosferatu.
No. 2555495
>>2555479Exploitation and cheap labour ofcourse it's like this
>destroy the stability of these countries by waging wars,putting in puppet states funding those "radical" terror groups so you can steal their resources >make support groups and totally not government funded NGOs to "help" (exploit)the very people you fucked over >do charity to hide the war crimes you've done I think at this point it should be obvious
No. 2557441
>>2557136There's been a ton of covert white supremacist, right wing propaganda on this site lately that makes me want to leave.
>>2557363 Masons feel like one of the whitest groups to ever white… persecuted my ass. They barely even allow women to the day.
No. 2557928
File: 1749582742342.jpg (14.45 KB, 181x278, images.jpg)
>>2557441>Masons feel like one of the whitest groups to ever whitesurprisingly they have been there for a relatively long time, they basically allow anyone of any race or religion to join as long as they are male and have been wealthy for generations, a few ottoman political figures (such as the governor of syria) were masons and there are also mason lodges all across india.
No. 2558136
>>2558122I wish there was more discussion in the mainstream about high level masons but so much conspiracy talk is hyperfixated on satanic shit and rituals and magic woo woo shit instead of actually interesting discussion. I try and bring these up within circles I've been in and they get drowned out by the meaningless one eye Illuminati symbolism antivax satanism crap. Which in itself doesn't just feel like a distraction from the issue due to people's inability to look deeper but tinfoil within tinfoil, seems almost intentional.
Does anyone else think there's an overemphasis on stilly stupid meaningless conspiracies just to drown out the potentially truthful and interesting ones?
No. 2558183
>>2558136I'd probably be considered 'antivax' or at least vax skeptical for scientific reasons, so I don't really agree on the 'antivax' thing but with the rest of it yes, I do think there's likely a lot of salacious fake conspiracies spread around to cover up more 'pedestrian' but important conspiracies. Like I know a lot of rich and important people actually are unironically into weird occultist shit, so I wouldn't rule it out that freemasons might be into occultism or weird satanic symbolism, but it sure is convenient for people to start laughing at anyone who starts asking questions about judges being blackmailed or whatever to be like 'hahaha oh yeah and I bet they fly around on brooms and burn goats too lololol!' Even if they don't do anything like that and were all strict atheists it makes no sense that a bunch of important men in legal and business professions would just get together and never do each other any favors.
I also personally know people who knew the inner workings of some of these organizations - by 'these organizations' I don't mean masonic lodges, I mean like police departments and shit - and they know for sure there was favor trading, bribery, etc. going on all the time. People are way too naive about the types of shit powerful moids get up to and it does often feel like laughing at occult symbolism is just a way to distract from real discussion and make things sound silly to normies. It personally frustrates me because I have several older family members who are into researching conspiracy stuff and they will throw the most bizarre mix of actually true, verifiable things at me mixed in with totally nuts shit like magnetic COVID vaccines making keys stick to people or whatever kek. I keep trying to tell them 'no one takes you seriously because you equally fall for both plausible and extremely implausible things' but they never listen and then the stupider things they say make everyone discount everything they say even though they've put me onto some very interesting information that was actually verifiable and easy to source as well.
No. 2558314
File: 1749601014509.jpeg (538 KB, 780x861, IMG_9086.jpeg)
Bonnie Blue is a demonic entity unleashed by the elites to sow discord and division on planet earth. You cannot convince me this being has a soul.
No. 2558408
>>2558136Obviously they put out fake conspiracies to distract from real ones, but it'd also be naive to think they dont paint real ones as outlandish too. You inject an easily disprovable claim into a real conspiracy so that it can be disproven and dunked on via reddit post, then the whole thing gets called crazy. That is the tinfoil within the tinfoil. Im pretty sure thats what happened with pizzagate. Are children being trafficked in DCvia pizzashop for satanic purposes? Probably not, but children are almost certainly being trafficked at high levels and if you make up a conspiracy where the key players are accused of satanic rituals in places that dont exist, you can convince the average person that the whole thing is fake. Digging into “fake” conspiracies usually reveals these grains of truth.
But also your “interesting and potentially truthful” seems way off, the fact that you throw out antivax as ridiculous makes me think you're not in that deep anyway. Thats honestly one of the more realistic ones. And “Rich people with connections pull strings for Rich people with connections” is so obvious I wouldn't even call that a conspiracy theory. It's also so obvious its not interesting at a surface level, and once you start digging into who is exactly pulling strings for who and for what purpose, you quickly end up in territory thats going to label you a satanic antivax nut. But basically im saying the nut is mixed up with the truth so thoroughly that dismissing anything that isnt milquetoast “its a big club and youre not in it” takes is gonna throw out the baby with the bathwater
No. 2558477
>>2558408Some of the people implicated in pizzagate were definitely both pedos and occultists. That Alefantis moid or whatever had a whole house tour out on some youtube channel and his whole house was full of weird sadistic pedo art, demon statues and dungeon-like rooms. Not sure if they were using a literal pizza shop to traffic the children (though stranger things have happened) but it wasn't just a totally ridiculous random conspiracy that people came up with - the emails were very weird and 'pizza' was in fact a known code word for children.
>“Rich people with connections pull strings for Rich people with connections” is so obvious I wouldn't even call that a conspiracy theory. NTA but a huge number of people will vehemently deny that Masons do this or that this is one of the purposes of Masonic lodges, so obviously it is not actually that self-evident to your average retard.
No. 2559546
>>2559408Similar experience here. For me the difference was moving from a city to a rural-ish town. My current dentist will straight up tell you that tooth will hold on for a couple more years. Will give you a timeline like in 2/3 years you'll wanna get that seen to. It's such a non fancy looking place on the outside and in the waiting room but the best I've been to. Great at getting you relaxed in the chair and doesn't scare you on the way out the door either with a list of more things you totes need to come back for. Refreshing.
Dentists in the city I'm originally from would be too afraid you might switch dentist if you let a non-pressing issue be for a while. They want do the most amount of work while they have you in their chair. All about rushing you and the worst part.. scaring you into snap decisions.
No. 2559548
>>2559419>shill me products that sponsor them like colgate toothpaste, floss, and mouthwash.Like give out products in a goody bag or tell you to go buy things like a tik tok ad?
You people must be running into corporate dentists (aspen, heartland) that have quotas that their dentists must sell so many crowns, fillings, whatever in a month. The old school dentists don’t do this I feel bad those guys are going away
No. 2559720
File: 1749681276372.webp (74.99 KB, 1000x1500, labubu-brown.webp)
This post is completely unironical. These things, or rather, the cultural, economic and even mental impact they had on people around the WORLD has to be backed up by very dark forces. It is not the first time people act retarded and punch each other over worthless trendy items, and i'm in fact denouncing every single one of these instances with this single post, by calling out this so called "labubu" trend. There's nothing normal about it, they way people react to these things, the look in their eyes, they seem almost possessed or something the moment they interact with the plushies, it always attracts a very specific kind of individual no matter the country. There's been break ins in cars over these ugly toys, some even got mugged over these things. Lisa is one satanic witch for shilling these little monsters to the masses. They're ugly and not worth the hype, which is why i think there's witchcraft involved in their success
No. 2559929
>>2559720In the 80s it was Cabbage Patch Kids. People were flooding stores, ankles getting broken, store help having to brandish bats and tell shoppers to chill and back tf off, women getting trampled all because they wanted some hideous Chernobyl monstrosity for their child. It's not anything occult, it's just regular human greed and consoomerism in action.
>>2559901This. Their dopamine and reward systems are fried to hell from doomscrolling on TikTok and short form content.
No. 2561290
>>2559548Tell me to go buy things. they show stuff they use in their dental office and tell me where to get it or i can just buy it from them right on the spot. also what do u mean by aspen heartland?
my old dentist was an old school dentist and in love with his craft that he's still doing his job at the ripe age of 70.
No. 2562124
>>2562121I think they just want Lebensraum, but obviously they don't give a fuck if it takes destabilising the entire region to get it, because they know Daddy USA will always support them and they'll never have to deal with the find out part of fucking around.
I can only laugh at them claiming it's a preemptive strike when what they're preempting is Iran retaliating to Israel attacking them unprovoked. And this is going to be worse for the Middle East as a whole than the genocide in Gaza and the attacks on Lebanon because Iran is supported by Russia.
No. 2562144
>>2562124Proxy war after proxy war after proxy war. Thats all we're going to see for the next few years until it boils over. And it's laughable how off the leash Isre*l has gotten with the US, clearly for years we thought we had them on a leash just for them to do whatever they damn well please. I think mark Rubio (i think) tweeted that the US had no involvement in the strike just for Trumps stupid ass to snitch this morning by saying the opposite kek. The past 5 years has been making me want to fedpost so bad but I know they're all over the web watching us. We got out of the middle east just to come back bc the pet retard of the region can't hold back their
trigger fingers.
No. 2562316
>>2558314I don't understand why it works. I don't understand why any of this shit works on so many people.
Millions of women have gotten lots of plastic surgery and engaged in sexually degrading behaviors. The "cock destroyers" were a gag duo, but they weren't faking what they did. One of them passed away as a result of that lifestyle.
Bonnie Blue doesn't do or say anything novel. Her "defenses" and talking points are half-assed bait that wouldn't even net you five responses if you posted them in the unpopular opinions thread on LC. Her voice is monotone, there is nothing behind her eyes, she doesn't care and clearly goes through the motions because she knows what sells. She wasn't even the first to go viral for having sex with lots of men in one day, that was Lily Phillips. I keep scrolling whenever I see her face on social media because there is nothing to talk about or learn. I already sat through multiple different versions of this same persona calling themselves feminists or trying to be "cool girls" from 2015 to 2022, it's the same libfem and pickme stuff. Instead of noting the same thing, people keep acting as if she's setting the bar, saying particularly crazy things or changing society. I know a lot of it is artificial/botted (she probably has the same PR people as the Tate or Paul brothers), but there's no reason to eat it up.
No one can explain to me why anyone should care about this wealthy, drug addicted woman performing degrading publicity stunts for money. She doesn't need anyone on the outside to come save her, and she isn't a role model to kids. She's just an idiot. So why?
No. 2562361
File: 1749836728356.png (46.86 KB, 885x420, drones.png)
>>2562121>Somehow mossad was able to build A FUCKING DRONE FACILITY under Iran's nose The drones came from the US. They were going to go to Ukraine until last week. Idk about the rest.
No. 2562840
File: 1749858098151.jpg (101.89 KB, 770x513, 1000004564.jpg)
>>2562361I've been saying this for ages. Iran is encircled by US military bases. It's so obvious that the attack was American and Israel agreed to take the fall for it. Why? Same reason Israel was happy to take all credit for 9/11 - it makes them seem all-powerful. Israel and the US have an exemplary codependent bully relationship-
No. 2562858
File: 1749858644001.jpg (Spoiler Image,24.44 KB, 400x400, 1000004565.jpg)
>>2562847Masons own the media industry and there absolutely is a psyop to make ugly old rich men seem attractive to young girls. Some horny old moid is literally rehashing all those sexist old man and young girl, 1970s ads and movie references for women like Sabrina Carpenter to regurgitate directly into her retarded tween fans mouths, just like how millennial and zoomer women got psyopped into sugarbabying by LDR. These moids are absolutely desperate to recruit as many teenagers into the porn and prostitution industry as possible because these moids are ugly incels and paying for sex is as close as theyll ever get to the 'teenage experience' that they missed out on in their youth.
No. 2562902
>>2562863Sorry, but who cares? It's true. She has gross, empty eyes because she's constantly on drugs. Not everything has to be some magical new revelation, kek. We also breathe oxygen.
For as long as I'm forced to see and hear about that individual without my consent, I will note that she looks and behaves in an utterly soulless way. Coomer men like that because many of them also lack souls, not surprising.
No. 2563621
File: 1749910200016.jpeg (78.87 KB, 1280x720, IMG_2671.jpeg)
I know I'm being paranoid, but I legit feel social media is the 1%'s attempt at brainwashing/influencing the general public to make us think like them, which is extremely narc. I say this because social media is anything but a social experience, it's anti-social.
people there lie, paint a better version of themselves, pretend to be educated, kind and empathetic when they really only care about themselves. its a conceited experience and all is placed above connecting with another human being. people dont really care about each other, people are more worried about "curating" their image; omg what if i loose followers or say the wrong thing ill have to over explain. people put themselves above others and talk over each other by pretending to be experts.
any generic or vague political or mental health statement you see an influencer make is really an excuse to talk about themselves. doesnt that mirror how corporations communicate to us in the form of adveritsing? may be that’s why i prefer to follow corporate brand accounts, or even an indie seller accounts because i at least know how the messages are molded and the endgoal is (my money) and can just read into my own confirmation biases into what theyre saying to feel better about myself.
its amusing seeing cows ruin their lives by putting their entire life into their social media, and seeing the flipside of how terrible their personal life is (in reality being a terrible mom/parent, a drunk and/or drug addict, women with raging insecurities have no female friends and instead pander to pervy ass men, etc). my problem is that its becoming too common at an alarming rate. I think we all know at least one person who went off the deep end with social media. its like basement dwellers went mobile but did not gain anything from the transition. like are we gonna have to kill the social media gods before we see any improvement??
No. 2564459
>>2563621Social media is just a way for the government to spy on its citizens. Normalize oversharing absolutely everything. Facebook was the first one: we all know now that it was basically one giant data mining site and that Zuck sold users details to the government. Instagram is likely some kind of AI-training database for the government to hone its facial recognition software, like China does with Weibo and Douyin.
Think about how anytime someone makes the news nowadays, how fast the internet is to doxx that person and obtain their full name and multiple pictures.
No. 2564517
>>2564509Oh for sure, it's just that women on imageboards
other than 4troon tend to be less "normie"/more blackpilled and on LC specifically very likely to be weebs with a preference for bishie types. I just don't believe there is such a large subset of women who are aware of all the psyops and still genuinely into that shit, especially an amount significant enough to notice a pattern.
No. 2564520
>>2564517Some of the women I've known with the worst taste in moids were NEET/nerd type women though which there are a lot of on lolcow. Yes lolcow is full of weebs who love bishies but also full of anons who think Luigi Mangione is the peak of attractiveness kek, not every weeb develops very good taste in men irl and some are more desperate than the average woman due to moving in nerd circles. Fat man preference ime has always correlated heavily with nerdiness. The normie women I know tend to have much higher standards for male attractiveness.
The posters that post those things are probably just the same small handful of people posting it over and over though not a large subset of women. There aren't that many users on lolcow and a lot of the users clearly spam their pet topics across multiple threads (which is to be expected).
No. 2564583
>>2564517NTA but no nona, don't backtrack. A TON of women on this site have absolutely horrible taste in men.
It's very evident in the unconventional thread (but hey at least those nonas know where their ugly husbandos belong) where a ton of straight up hideous 2-3/10 max moids get posted. And you can tell its real women posting these men because they're usually moids connected with some extremely autistic female fanbase or some fugly 70s moids from a prog rock band and the way the women fawn over them is obviously authentically female. At the same time, that one samefag anon who goes into the conventional thread to call all the men hideous is an annoying sperg loser trying to larp as some picky Stacy which is equally irritating and actually gives me the vibe that its a jealous male anon calling all the male models 'elbows too pointy would not bang'.
No. 2564596
>>2559720There's no esoteric conspiracy nona, it's just marketing.
'DESPERATE LABUBU FANS SHOVE EACH OTHER TO THE GROUND AND CURBSTOMP EACH OTHER TO GET NEW RELEASE' is just a marketing gimmick to create false demand. They claim these hideous things are sold out everywhere but whenever I check they're all still in stock kek. A more interesting and creepier conspiracy to me would be why normies are such a retarded hivemind and why do they always fall for the obvious tricks of marketing companies?
No. 2564607
>>2564596NTA but I think it's lack of meaning and purpose in life and the fact that people have gotten away from 'our roots' in nature. All this consoom shit seems incredibly boring and pointless to anyone who spends significant time in nature or has real creative hobbies or a sense of real purpose in life. I have never even heard of this labubu thing in my life and I think many other people like me who don't spend our time on normie social media would never understand what's appealing about any iteration of these trendy items, and wouldn't even know they were supposed to be desirable. Whenever I went to TJMAXX stores I always saw a ton of those ugly fleece blankets women seem to madly collect in the consoom thread or those ceramics with the ugly writing on them, and I just assumed they were ugly unwanted items that ended up in TJMAXX due to lack of demand. If you go outside and look at a lake or a forest or pretty flowers or you dance or make music or costumes, you're not going to see any appeal in random plastic garbage let alone want to stand in lines and trample people to get it. You couldn't pay me to have that thing in my house.
But unfortunately our society is creating a situation where more and more people are just burnt-out automatons, coming home from their meaningless shitty job feeling like they have no energy for anything other than scrolling tiktok and watching netflix. When you get to that point the human instinct for in-group behavior takes over and you direct your energy toward whatever it seems like other people around you are assigning meaning to, which marketing companies have caught on to. They can easily astroturf online social spaces and convince a bunch of tired, burnt-out people lacking life purpose that everyone else really wants the stanley cup, so you won't be as fulfilled as them if you don't have it too. This works especially well on teenagers and young women, and it seemed to take off especially during COVID lockdowns, when people weren't socializing irl or going outside. It goes way back though, that's what the phrase 'keeping up with the Joneses' was meant to convey. Your neighbor would get a 'nicer' car or a 'nicer' washing machine or the trendy haircut so you did it too to not feel deprived compared to the Joneses. It's a way to keep people in the thankless consoom economic productivity cycle when their jobs are so disconnected from their real-life outputs. 100s of years ago if you fished for a living, you would get a bunch of fish, and then you'd get to feed other people with the fish, and trade the fish for other things you needed. There would be some meaning and purpose in catching more fish and making better tools to catch fish. Now many people go sit in an office cubicle and send some emails about some documents that aren't personally important to them, having no idea what they will eventually be useful for and to whom. That just isn't satisfying on a deeper level.
No. 2565092
>>2564607I mainly agree, but I think being in nature is secondary to creative outlets and a sense of purpose.
I've just seen people take their Labubus hiking and camping with them, but no one I know with a creative hobby or life mission is into Labubus and pointless consoom like that.
No. 2565155
>>2565090Kek anon I also was accused of being a scrote psyopper for complaining about Asian guys but I just complained about them because I live in an area where there's tons of them so I know they suck too. The portrayal of them in the media is not realistic and that's where I think some anons are getting this idea they're the perfect moids.
>>2565092>being in nature is secondary to creative outlets and a sense of purpose. I think it's all related. When people actually had to live in nature (not just go on a hike, but like actually interact with the natural world on a regular basis to survive), a sense of purpose was much more obvious and more closely linked to survival and the natural world. Just going on the occasional hike doesn't really mean you're engaged with nature, as hiking and camping are just popular Things to Do now. But if you actually spend time paying attention to the natural environment and working on survival skills within it, it becomes increasingly difficult to find any aesthetic appeal or functional appeal in useless plastic trash.
No. 2565250
>>2565240Is he actually gonna do that though? I don't really believe any of his promises are actually going to happen, out of all the things he could have done the only one he's actually done so far AFAIK is banning some dyes.
>pulls the plug on pharma advertisingI'm not sure if that would be enough to stop the trajectory of normie thought and speech habits though. We went through an entire 'pandemic' that was 24/7 pharma shilling, I think it's so deeply ingrained in people's psyches now that no decrease in pharma advertising will make them stop anytime soon. It's just a normal fact now that you must be bad and evil if you say too many negative things about pharma, like those evil antivaxers and those evil vitamin-takers.
No. 2565296
>>2565250It takes time to do things. he's actually made fairly good progress in the few months he's been in office. I do believe this will happen.
Normie brainwashing collapses when there's no media support to back it up. I'd say already 40-50% of people are skeptical. Most just don't speak up because the media sets the overton window to some extent.
No. 2565301
>>2565211Everybody who was on my ass about not getting the covid vax now tells me I was right and they wish they questioned a brand-new vaccine that was borderline mandatory to get too. I dont know why its impossible for so many to even conceive the idea that a vaccine could be ineffective, harmful, or rushed? But
all these other things are ok to criticise, but dont you DARE say anything mean about my vaccines! Honestly i think its people not wanting to confront the reality that they were basically forced to be injected with new experimental drugs, that didnt really do shit and nobody knows if theyll cause symptoms years or decades down the line.
No. 2565362
>>2565296I hope you're right nonna. A lot of the promises he initially made seemed promising, but between AI being used to fast-track clinical trials/drug approvals and some other things that have been announced recently I'm not holding my breath.
>Normie brainwashing collapses when there's no media support to back it up. Eventually but it often takes a long time, like at least a generation or two. If you have been soaking in brainwashing for years and years it becomes second-nature to reinforce the brainwashing yourself casually in conversations with friends, and then the media isn't even necessary.
>>2565301I somewhat share your experience but I still am acquainted with a large number of people who wear masks in public, and are as convinced as ever that the vaccines for COVID were Safe and Effective and that anyone who didn't get all their boosters is basically a murderer.
>Honestly i think its people not wanting to confront the reality that they were basically forced to be injected with new experimental drugsI think it's partly this and partly not wanting to confront how evil they were to other people, including friends and family, about it. Once you died on the hill of I hope you die in a camp you evil murderer it's hard to just turn around and tell yourself, yeah I said that but I was the baddie.
No. 2565579
File: 1750025811636.webm (5.98 MB, 576x1024, 1000019139.webm)
>>2565552Here's a compilation of a few. So many black woman vs old white woman ones, it seriously feels like some kind of agenda is being pushed with these.
>>2565556Before this the AI videos I'd get were the dumb cat farting ones or disney pixar adjacent plots of revenge. I haven't seen people believing these particular videos are real but I also haven't seen anyone point out the weird number of them being "black woman says mean thing".
No. 2565699
>>2565662Why whats funny
>>>2565672You're very welcome
>>2565695I don't know what the hell is going on in xx. I started reading the dysphoria thread after it was locked and it contained some of the most rank misogyny I've ever seen but in a way that made me think it probably actually was mostly women.
No. 2565724
>>2564590On the white vs asian moids thing, I literally interjected to say that white and asian moids are two sides of one gross misogynistic coin and tell them their precious Korean and Japanese scrotes are just as gross as white moids and have pedophile tendencies + chimp out and attack/get women fired over feminist allegations, plus both WMAF and AMWF couples are 90% of the time just the moids fetishising their partners' race, and suddenly I have hoardes of anons reeing about me being jealous of them and their precious EA nigels and about how uhh acktually its totally different and not just the same old story of fetishistic pornsick scrotes. There are way more undercover scrotes on this website than we account for, I hate how the jannies ban people for scrotefoiling when the post is so obviously typed with male hands, but will only ever ban moids for being moids when they outright declare it, even when its the most obvious thing in the world. I also don't think it's productive to incessantly infight and accuse everyone who disagrees with you of being a scrote, but we should be able to point out the obvious without risking a ban
>>2564560I absolutely agree with the Pedro Pascal retardery being targeted at young girls and women, I'm a zoomer and a couple years back when the Pedro Pascal mass delusion was starting to get huge, it was all over tiktok as the white guy of the month, videos claiming he was literwally the hottest man in existence kept on coming up on my feed even after I ignored them and didn't engage whatsoever with them, and half my friendgroup was obsessing over him and wouldn't stop going on about him for actual months. It was hellish and boring
sage for blog No. 2565741
>>2565724The only time Pedro Pascal recently came up in a discussion with my friends it was one of my friends mentioning how hideous he is and not understanding why he is in every hit show, but we're millennials. The other thing I remember him from is The Mentalist (he was a lot younger then) but he played the love interest of the main female character and I felt jumpscared by them pairing her with such a weird hideous looking man. He's not even one of those hollywood actors who used to look good when he was younger, he literally always looked ugly and weird. He was around for so long and no one thought he was a heartthrob so it's obvious the simping for him isn't the least bit organic, same as all the Honter Schafer simping and 'omgg "she" needs to play Zelda' is obviously not organic.
>I literally interjected to say that white and asian moids are two sides of one gross misogynistic coin …and suddenly I have hoardes of anons reeing about me being jealous of them and their precious EA nigels NTAYRT but I think theres some very dedicated weebs and koreaboos here who just get like that because they're still dreaming of moving to asia and finding a chivalrous moid who looks like an actor and acts like a TV character kek. I don't know which specific conversation you're talking about so it's very likely you were talking to a moid but some women really are that delusional.
No. 2565754
>>2565741He's actually not even of average looks, he's ugly, hairy, walled, and gives off gay vibes, but we're meant to believe he's a heartthrob? It's all so manufactured and fake. I stopped being friends with those girls because they were super homophobic to me (I'm bi and like women way more) so maybe it was just me being surrounded by idiots, but I don't know. Even the ones who didn't like Pedro Pascal all seemed to like ugly old scrotes, apart from one girl who was an awful person, but the only one of us getting any actual play. I feel the same way about that actor from Severance who always looks like he's just sucked a lemon and who the writers couldn't resist pairing with the gorgeous main female character who is like 20 years younger than him, AND giving him a modelesque wife. I've already been seeing edits of him floating around on tiktok when he is so hard on the eyes it actually made the show harder to watch for me.
>some women really are that delusionalYes, I agree with this and recognise that some of them probably were weaboo/koreaboo girls with deluded expectations, but some of the phrasing was so moidish, especially this one anon who was seething about me being jealous of 'her' and 'her' perfect asian nigel and mad I can't get an asian moid for myself that just struck out to me as odd and so so obviously typed by a man offended about how he's not being revered 24/7
No. 2566696
>>2564590That's just the resident well poisoner tranny. The one who always larps as oppressed
POC women and acts like hes some radical thinker by siding with Whites as a 'Black woman' or siding with Israel as a 'ex Muslim'. He does it every single day kek. He also claims to be MENA because he's 2% Persian Jew or something even though he's really a 5ft7 white boy from Bumfuck Wisconsin kek.
No. 2567084
File: 1750131767958.png (196.9 KB, 739x762, loftus legal work.png)
Continuing a conversation from gender thread because I think it fits better here and I can freely sperg away (I hope), about the 'false memory' controversy. TL;DR the main figure known for popularizing the idea that memories of trauma are often false and that witness testimonies (from abuse
victims) are unreliable is Elizabeth Loftus. Other anon did not believe me that Loftus has engaged in various shady practices and has had a conflict of interest since the beginning of her career. Other anon claimed what I said about Loftus was 'libel' so I want to back it up here especially since it may be of interest to tinfoilers.
First of all I'm not a proponent of 'memory recovery,' I'm posting here to show that a lot of Loftus's other work to discredit abuse survivors (by claiming false memories can easily be induced, claiming memory of traumatic events are likely to be substantively wrong and witness testimonies based on memory should be thrown out, etc) has been both shoddy work and involved fraud and ethics violations, and also that she had reasons other than scientific curiosity for performing the work.
First of all picrel is from the following NBC article about Loftus's involvement in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial:
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/ghislane-maxwell-s-guilty-verdict-exposes-defense-s-victim-blaming-ncna1286352
Loftus testified at the Harvey Weinstein trial she was being paid $600/hour for her consultancy, so I'm sure she was paid at least as much for the Maxwell trial. She's also helped out the legal teams of Ted Bundy, O.J. Simpson, Michael Jackson, Bill Cosby, etc. She obviously makes a lot of money doing this. In Bill Cosby's case in particular, she was called by the defense to convice the judge not to allow any of Cosby's accusers to testify (from CBS news):
>Cosby’s lawyers want the accusers barred from testifying at his trial on charges that he sexually assaulted a woman at his suburban Philadelphia home in 2004. The defense was expected to attack their credibility and relevance as they try to keep them off the witness stand.>They encountered an early setback Tuesday when O’Neill refused to hear from one of their experts, Elizabeth Loftus, a psychologist who has questioned the reliability of eyewitness and witness memory. The judge said Loftus wouldn’t help him decide if the accusers can testify but added she might be allowed to take the stand at Cosby’s trial next year.I'm sure anon I was arguing with wouldn't agree this is a reliable source, but to explain some of the context for why I say Loftus was getting big money for her false memory work prior to her book publication in 1994, I direct you to this article from The Cut that explains the origins of the False Memory Foundation, which was established by 2 parents of a professor Jennifer Freyd who privately accused her father (a renowned professor who himself claimed to be sexually abused as a child) of sexual abuse during her childhood and teenage years:
>[Jennifer's mother, also a professor] anonymously published an academic article in a small journal** called Issues in Child Abuse Accusations. Using pseudonyms (Jennifer is “Susan”), Pam describes her daughter’s claim against her husband and outlines her defense. Her daughter “had done lots of experimenting with drugs when she was a teenager,” she writes, speculating about whether that might explain the mistaken memories. Other potential explanations: her daughter’s marital problems (including a lackluster sex life), new motherhood, career stress, nursing her son for too long, jealousy of her mother’s professional success, a history of anorexia, a feminist therapist, and The Courage to Heal — a book then gaining prominence in feminist and trauma-therapy circles — which Pam calls “slop.”>Jennifer didn’t know her mother was writing the article until a stack of copies showed up at her place of work. Jennifer was, at the time, under consideration for promotion to full professor. At least one of the copies contained a note from her mother, identifying herself as the author and Jennifer as the subject. The article was titled “How Could This Happen? Coping With a False Accusation of Incest and Rape.”>A month later, Pam’s article was covered by her hometown newspaper, the Philadelphia Inquirer. In a piece headlined “Accusations of Sex Abuse, Years Later,” reporter Darrell Sifford recounted the Freyds’ version of events, including a claim that Jennifer had recovered her memories through hypnosis. (Jennifer denies undergoing hypnosis, then or ever.)The article details how Loftus was recruited in 1992 for the organization:
>So the Freyds — both proud academics — built one themselves. On the heels of the national panic over satanic-ritual child abuse in the 1980s, the False Memory Syndrome Foundation helped shift cultural sympathies from alleged victims to the accused, portraying survivors as casualties of radical-feminist therapists who “implanted” memories of child abuse in gullible patients. The theory the Freyds promoted made its way into college textbooks, syndicated talk shows, and Supreme Court confirmation hearings. With the help of Ralph Underwager and Hollida Wakefield, married psychologists who had gained prominence as expert witnesses for defendants accused of satanic-ritual abuse, the Freyds recruited a highly credentialed advisory board. Among the members were Paul McHugh, known in recent years for insisting that transgender people suffer from a psychological disorder, and Elizabeth Loftus, a psychology professor who testified on behalf of Ted Bundy in his 1976 trial, before he escaped and went on another killing spree.>Perhaps no one alive has been harder on memory’s reputation than Loftus. In 1974, the Department of Transportation awarded Loftus — then a newly minted Ph.D. in psychology — a grant to study memory distortion among eyewitnesses of car accidents. That same year, she used her findings to assist a public defender in a murder trial; the defendant got off, and Loftus has had no shortage of work as an expert witness ever since.This confirms that Loftus was defending criminals in court (for a fee of course) long before the publication of her 1994 book and that this was a regular money-making gig for her.
(1/3 probably)
No. 2567088
File: 1750132297529.png (116.27 KB, 927x299, false memory syndrome foundati…)
Almost 2 decades after Loftus started working as an expert witness for high-profile defense cases, she (according to the article) developed a particular interest in sexual abuse cases. She then decided to find a way to prove that memories can be fabricated. This was not a response to the satanic panic or a book in 1980 on 'recovered memory through hypnosis' as the original anon claimed, since her work on this topic started in 1974. However, the focus on sexual abuse allegations began in the early 90s:
>Loftus believed that Eileen’s memories were entirely false and suspected her hypnosis might have been to blame. She wanted to figure out if (and how) it was possible to implant a seed of false memory that might then grow into a richly detailed fabrication. “At some point,” she says, “I came up with the idea: Why don’t we try to make people believe and remember that they were lost in a shopping mall — that they were frightened and crying and ultimately rescued and reunited with their family?” Loftus, then a professor of psychology at the University of Washington, offered this challenge to her undergrad students in cognitive psych as an extra-credit assignment.
The first study found that only a small number of people really believed the implanted false memory, a banal memory of being lost in the mall as a child:
>Loftus repeated the procedure with 24 subjects… in each case, the subjects were provided with corroboration from a relative (“Your mom told me that X happened to you when you were 5”). They were then asked to write about the experiences, to add details as they resurfaced, and to rate their confidence in their memories. At the conclusion of the experiment, the interviewer told the subjects that one of the memories they had been given was false and asked them to identify which one it was. Nineteen correctly chose the mall. Only six “fully or partially” believed the false memory.
>Over the years, critics have pointed out a number of significant methodological flaws in what has become known as the “Lost in the Mall” study. First, it’s unclear what counts as a “full” or “partial” memory. The mean clarity rating among subjects who believed the false memory was only 3.6 out of ten, compared to 6.3 for true memories.
>Key to the study, too, is the role of the older relative who serves as an “eyewitness” to the fake incident — something no therapist, however talented at hypnotic suggestion, could claim.
Loftus also continues to cite this study in high-profile trials:
>Today, Loftus is irked by her critics’ fixation on the mall study, which has been cited 579 times since its publication in 1995. “This study was 25 years ago,” she tells me … But it is Loftus herself who perpetuates the study… In her testimony [in the Harvey Weinstein trial], Loftus, now 76, explained how false memories could be implanted and believed, citing the mall study as evidence.
>She has also cited it in many of the more than 300 trials in which she has served as an expert witness and in the TED Talk she gave in 2013, which has been viewed 6.6 million times. When Loftus says “about a quarter” of people can be made to believe false memories that are externally implanted, she is citing a figure that originated with the six subjects in the mall study.
>It’s true that this figure has been borne out by a handful of similar studies. In 2017, a mega-analysis of eight peer-reviewed false-memory experiments found that 30 percent of subjects appeared to develop varying levels of false memory, from “robust” to “partial,” as defined by the researchers. In addition, another 23 percent of subjects accepted the false event as true “to some degree,” even though they did not actually remember it having happened.* Crucially, however, none of the experiments involved convincing subjects they had been sexually abused as children.
>In a variation on the mall study published in 1997, researchers sought to emphasize this distinction by presenting subjects with one true memory and two false ones: being lost in the mall and receiving a rectal enema. The hypothesis was that the less plausible event, the enema, wouldn’t create false memories so easily. Three of 20 subjects “remembered” having been lost in the mall. Zero remembered the enema.
The guy who helped her come up with the original lost in the mall study is now a professor himself, and apparently has repeatedly refused to testify as an expert witness. He also says
>“I got five points,” Coan says. “Five points and decades of grief.”
Oh by the way the False Memory foundation's founders (you know, the ones who hired Loftus right before she developed a sudden interest in sexual abuse memories? Right after the father was accused of molestation by his daughter? Yeah, those ones) were stepsiblings who met when they were preteens.
>They met as children in Providence, Rhode Island: Pam’s mother married Peter’s father when Pam was 12 and Peter was 14.
>Before they became intimate, Peter told Pam about his involvement as a younger boy with a much older male artist, then famous in Providence. The man taught weekend art classes to children, a number of whom became his victims. The artist began sexually abusing Peter from when he was around 7 to 11 years old.
>A former student I’ll call Stephen, who grew close to Peter, describes the provocations differently. Peter, he says, was “always pretending to be a sociopath.”
>With Pam out of earshot, Peter often shifted the conversation to his sexuality. He acknowledged that he was gay and tried to convince Stephen that he was, too. “No, you really are,” Stephen recalls him saying. “You have that wounded-stag look about you.” A few years later, Stephen says, Peter propositioned him after a night of drinking. When Stephen declined, Peter began going through the kitchen drawers and pulling out knives before finally backing off.
>Peter admits to having propositioned Stephen, though he says he did so only because he felt Stephen had been wanting it for so long.
>He assumed Pam knew, since he had always been open about being attracted to men as well as women. Later in the same conversation, Pam tells me she did not know Peter had made sexual overtures to Stephen or other young men. “I didn’t see it,” she says. “It could easily be I didn’t want to.” Those dozen words, as it happens, are essentially the ones Jennifer has longed to hear from her mother for the past 30 years.
Peter also went to rehab after his daughter went to college.
>Pam insists that the FMSF does not discount the prevalence of child sex abuse; she describes her husband’s own experience of abuse as a child in Providence as a sort of valuable (if unwanted) tutorial on what is and is not appropriate between adults and children. Nobody, she says, knows more about the damage done by child sex abuse than Peter Freyd. Where he differs from his daughter, according to Pam, is his attitude about it. “You can let experiences in life turn you into a victim, or you can take the approach that you’re going to be above it,” she says. “He wasn’t going to let it destroy his life.” Even in his experience of child sex abuse, it would seem, Peter is superior to others.
>Pam warmly replied to many of the thousands of parents who contacted the foundation seeking help for their children's sexual abuse allegations, often following up years later asking if they were still in touch with their children and commiserating with them (my paraphrase)
>Peter, in fact, professes to be nonchalant about what the older artist did to him when he was 11 years old. It was “technically abuse,” he tells me, but he isn’t angry or upset about it. “Studies have been done,” he insists, that show “many, many people aren’t terribly bothered” by the sexual abuse they suffered as children. He and Pam entertained the artist who molested him as a guest in their home.
>[Pam] still has a pile of Jennifer’s and Gwen’s letters and childhood belongings. In the early years of their estrangement, she occasionally mailed them odds and ends from the house in Philadelphia — sometimes with a note, sometimes without. Neither daughter ever replied.
Nothing sus. I wonder why the other daughter was estranged and refused to see them from the beginning, even before Jennifer 'recovered' her memories?
(2/3 probably).
No. 2567089
File: 1750132528151.png (419.43 KB, 846x844, abcnews article on Orne.png)
Regarding the veracity of 'repressed memory' itself the article interviews a few other researchers who say the evidence for it is mixed, for instance:
>Jonathan Schooler, a professor of psychological and brain sciences at the University of California, Santa Barbara, has identified several cases in which people appeared to genuinely gain access to “new” memories of abuse, as well as corroborating evidence that suggested those memories depicted true events. But in some cases, the memory wasn’t new at all — the person had previously told someone about the abuse or had written about it in their journal. They thought they were remembering something they had forgotten; in reality, what they had forgotten was that they had previously remembered it.>[Another Clinical Psychologist] offers a simpler explanation of why memories of childhood abuse sometimes resurface in adulthood. “People can forget things, and they can later come back to mind,” he says. It’s a rare point of agreement between psychologists and those in the false-memory camp. Even Loftus acknowledges that memories sometimes resurface because of “ordinary forgetting and remembering.”>“I was just astounded that this big lie could be perpetrated with impunity and with great success across all major media,” says Hopper, the Harvard psychologist. The concept of false memory does more than provide child sex abusers with a pseudoscientific defense — it offers a perversely reassuring explanation for anyone who wants to believe that such abuse is less common than it actually is. The False Memory Syndrome Foundation also assumed every single child abuse case they were involved in (thousands) was a false allegation, even if they didn't involve recovered memory at all but consistent non-repressed memory:
>every single parent who reached out to the FMSF over the years was presumed innocent. All of their children’s allegations, by the same token, were presumed to be false, even if the child had always remembered the abuse but confronted their parents only as an adult. >In the foundation’s newsletter dated February 29, 1992 (not included in its online archive), in an article titled “How Do We Know That We Are Not Representing Pedophiles,” Freyd explained why she thought it unlikely that the group’s hundreds of members included any perpetrators: “We are a good-looking bunch of people, graying hair, well dressed, healthy, smiling; just about every person who has attended is someone you would surely find interesting and want to count as a friend.”The foundation's other scientist members included people who were open supporters of pedophilia:
>A year after the organization was founded, an interview Ralph Underwager and Hollida Wakefield had given in 1991 to a Dutch pro-pedophilia magazine called Paidika came to light. In it, Underwager argues that pedophiles are too defensive about their sexual orientation, which he likens to homosexuality and heterosexuality. Pedophilia, he wrote, is a “responsible” choice, an “acceptable expression of God’s will for love and unity among human beings.” Underwager was removed from the board, but Wakefield was allowed to remain. Ralph Underwager also said this according to his Wikipedia:
>He characterized child protection investigations as nothing less than an "assault on the family as an institution"[11] and he alleged that 75% of mothers alleging sexual abuse in custody proceedings suffered from a "severe personality disorder" that prompted them to manufacture false allegations.[12] He claimed that forensic interviews with children inevitably lead the child to confabulate an account of satanic ritual abuse because the "fantasy world of children is filled with mayhem, murder, cannibalism, blood and gore."[13] He claimed that all forensic interviews with children provoked this sadistic sexual fantasy life, creating "psychotic" and sexualized children who were "ruined for life."[14]
>The FMSF had raised more than $7.7 million since its foundingI wonder if any of that money was paid to members of its Advisory Board, including Loftus? Their Wiki page claims a lot of the money they raised went to legal support for the parents accused of abuse who contacted them as well as 'raising awareness in the media.'
>The false-memory narrative and the Lost in the Mall study have also made their way into many of the most popular introductory psychology textbooks. After required freshman writing courses, intro psych is the most frequently taken college class in the United States.For the tinfoilers out there, some of the other founding members and/or advisory board members of the organization were associated with MKUltra, namely
>Martin Orne ("Dr. Martin T. Orne '48, the director of a Medical School hypnosis research project in the early '60s, outlined how his group unwittingly received $30,000 from the CIA." see source here: https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1978/2/11/harvard-and-the-cia-continued-pbabnother/) >Dr. Jolly aka Louis West who conducted LSD research for the CIA and was tapped for the post-assassination interviews of both the alleged Lee Harvey Oswald and RFK assassins, as well as the Oklahoma City Bombers (https://theintercept.com/2019/11/24/cia-mkultra-louis-jolyon-west/). >Harold Lief was another suspicious figure associated with them, who invented his own spurious DSM diagnosis: "Harold I. Lief (1917–2007)[1] was an American psychiatrist and psychoanalyst. He was famous as an advocate of sex education. Lief is credited with the introduction in the DSM of the "inhibited sexual desire".This is what ISD is:
>sometimes considered a sexual dysfunction, and is characterized as a lack or absence of sexual fantasies and desire for sexual activity, as judged by a clinician. For this to be regarded as a disorder, it must cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulties and not be better accounted for by another mental disorder, a drug (legal or illegal), or some other medical condition. A person with ISD will not start, or respond to their partner's desire for, sexual activity.>Other terms used to describe the phenomenon include sexual aversion and sexual apathy.[1] More informal or colloquial terms are frigidity and frigidness.So Elizabeth Loftus is in really good company and you can tell by the types of illustrious researchers she spent her life working with on her 'false memory' theory that she is a very honest scientist with no conflicts of interest whatsoever.
vitably lead the child to confabulate an account of satanic ritual abuse because the "fantasy world of children is filled with mayhem, murder, cannibalism, blood and gore."[13] He claimed that all forensic interviews with children provoked this sadistic sexual fantasy life, creating "psychotic" and sexualized children who were "ruined for life."[14]
3/3 for now. This is getting ultralong but I had a few other sources about Loftus's misconduct specifically if anyone's interested.
No. 2567109
File: 1750133986511.png (199.74 KB, 664x810, loftus and jane doe saga.png)
Actually sorry one more post about this. The most well-known case where Loftus was accused of academic misconduct (although there were multiple) was the 'Jane Doe' case. Picrel (from this Slate article:
https://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_memory_doctor/2010/06/the_memory_doctor.single.html) shows how biased Loftus was, to the point of refusing to believe even videotape evidence that a repressed memory was real. The lengths she went to to try to find proof against 'Jane Doe' were … questionable, to say the least:
>But this mystery had to be solved. The power of the videotapes and the use of Jane's story in other court cases demanded an answer. What lay behind the tapes? What had really happened to this little girl? Loftus had to know. She had to leave her laboratory and become a detective.>Jane had accused her mother of abusing her. From the tapes, Loftus ascertained Jane's home county. She hired a private investigator to get records from the local courthouse. Using databases, obituaries, and Social Security death records, Loftus and a colleague, Melvin Guyer, identified Jane's father. They scoured files from the custody fight between Jane's parents. They found a psychological evaluation and a Child Protective Services report that cast doubt on Jane's story. They interviewed local doctors and nurses to debunk the medical evidence against Jane's mother.>Loftus interviewed Jane's mother at her home. She spent four hours with Jane's foster mother. Finally, she tracked down Jane's stepmother.>She discovered that Jane's mother had cooked on a gas stove, which couldn't have caused the coil-shaped burns Jane had attributed to her.(this one is especially weird, I have a gas stove with vaguely coil-shaped burners kek)
Anyway, ultimately there was some evidence the story may have been fabricated:
>This matched a comment from Jane's stepmother. "That's how we finally got her—the sexual angle," the stepmother told Loftus, referring to the custody fight she and Jane's father had waged against Jane's mother. "We were building a case against this woman. We were going for broke."The most concerning aspect of this story is the privacy violation itself, which she was legally targeted for:
>Before Loftus could publish her report, Jane Doe struck back. She told Loftus' employer, the University of Washington, that Loftus had violated her privacy. The university seized Loftus' files and barred her from publishing or discussing her findings. It took Loftus two years to win a letter of exoneration and another six years to get rid of Jane's subsequent lawsuit, which went all the way to the California Supreme Court. She eventually settled out of court with the Jane Doe
victim in the Supreme Court case, which was going ahead because she had lied about her identity to secure some of the interviews.
Another weird tidbit from this article is her work in jury selection to get a favorable verdict for defendants in sexual abuse cases:
>The most important game was jury selection. As attorneys became familiar with Loftus' expertise in psychology, they recruited her to be a jury consultant. Her job was to present the anticipated prosecution and defense arguments, in summary form, to several hundred people. Each respondent had to render a verdict.>In articles for legal journals, she deployed her expertise in juror psychology and her knowledge of how to alter beliefs. She counseled attorneys on jury selection and on coaching economists as expert witnesses to win bigger damage awards. In one article, she and a co-author suggested that lawyers might wish to "eliminate better-educated jurors who could serve as leaders in arguments against their clients.">Braun, Loftus, and their co-authors always disavowed deception. Yet they spelled out, for readers of Psychology & Marketing and the Journal of Advertising, exactly how their findings could be exploited. They analyzed which recollections were "better suited for memory revision": childhood memories in the case of Disney, college memories in the case of beer. They noted that since memory was fallible and malleable, advertisers could win back consumers who thought they'd had bad experiences with their products. From the advertiser's standpoint, they wrote, "you want the consumer to be involved enough that they process the false information" but "not so involved that … they notice the discrepancy between the advertising information and their own experience.">In a subsequent article for the Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Loftus, Braun, and Braun's husband (Braun, having added her husband's surname, was now Kathryn Braun-LaTour) demonstrated "how to employ reconstructed memory to help restore a brand damaged by a crisis." Her own explanation for encouraging memory tampering when consulting for companies or writing for economics journals:
>If Loftus didn't condone memory tampering, why was she explaining how to do it? In part, she was just doing as she had been trained. You had to get published, and publishers wanted value for their readers. No. 2567123
>>2567109Her early life is as expected. It's a special kind of evil to gaslight
victims just so you can get their rapists and abusers off scot free.
I think a lot of the memory falsification stuff is being pushed to gaslight the population into doubting ourselves.
No. 2567183
File: 1750140898857.png (322.85 KB, 1187x623, loftus childhood.png)
>>2567123>Her early life is as expected.What do you mean? Loftus's? Picrel is more disturbing shit she's said about her own childhood. Corroborated in
https://archive.is/VNfwE
>I think a lot of the memory falsification stuff is being pushed to gaslight the population into doubting ourselves.I agree. Sure I think 'recovered memory through hypnosis' is a bunch of bullshit and I'm glad it ended, but lionizing a person like this for contributing to that practice mostly being ended (as opposed to the many honest, ethical researchers who also contributed) makes no sense to me. Her motives were not to stop harmful/
abusive therapeutic practices, and she went way beyond disavowing hypnotic memory recovery when she founded a multimillion dollar organization with a bunch of pedophiles whose entire purpose was claiming that memories are likely false and memories of abuse should never be trusted. I would go so far as to call her ghoulishly evil because she's in her 80s now and is still acting as an expert in trials like the Maxwell trial where the other accused has already been convicted and there's no doubt they're both guilty. What do people like Loftus get out of this? She has so much money she could be retiring on a yacht in the mediterranean by now. Not to mention all the other famous 'scientists' involved in founding or advising for the organization, who seemed to do a lot less actual science (not a single paper actually showing false sexual abuse memories can be induced, yes I know it wouldn't pass ethics but they claim so boldly it's plausible) than pro-pedo activism and consulting for some of the most high-profile criminals of the 20th/21st century.
No. 2567627
File: 1750176680478.png (1.02 MB, 1334x1276, Screenshot 2025-06-17 at 9.10.…)
>>2567400it's already started. and this is with most veterans being male
No. 2567637
>>2567627The article doe not explain at all how saying that biological sex exists in this executive order
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/01/30/2025-02090/defending-women-from-gender-ideology-extremism-and-restoring-biological-truth-to-the-federal has caused this. It makes absolutely no logical sense at all that the VA heard 'troons aren't legally women' and thought 'oh no!! I guess we have to change all the rules about treating veterans now!'
No. 2567887
>>2567640I have never heard of a religion that does this please enlighten me because wtf???>>2565579
This videos simply came out of nowhere too. The accounts that made these videos are often brand new. My entire algorithm on TikTok became weird after the United States TikTok ban. I suddenly see teenage/ very young adult pregnancy,housewife content and bigotry when before I had mostly fandom content and art content with the occasional left lending political posts.
No. 2568013
File: 1750196912431.jpg (400.81 KB, 1080x1109, Screenshot_20250617-224749.jpg)
>>2567887I think they're talking about the Jewish bris ceremony
No. 2568370
File: 1750222307113.png (172.97 KB, 656x385, mcdonaldland memory.png)
>>2567084Continuing this conversation, my interlocutor from gender thread seems to be uninterested in my sources but in a last-ditch attempt to do the argument justice I will reply to her provided sources here (since they have nothing to do with gender ideology). The claim is that these two studies "demonstrate that it is absolutely possible for a therapist to implant a false memory into a patient" and "(t)hey didn't invent memories of abuse because of the ethics issue I touched on before, but they did go for things more traumatic than being lost in a mall."
She provided two sources for the claim traumatic memories like incestuous CSA memory can be induced, the first is:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227614253_False_Memories_of_Childhood_Experiences from 1995. The study asked participants to recall 2-5 true childhood memories provided by their parents, plus one false one that supposedly happened when they were 5 years old. If they were not able to recall the event, the interviewers prompted them with further details and people who supposedly had been at the event with them. They were then encouraged to try to remember the events they had forgotten over the following week, and then had a second interview where the interviewer more aggressively prompted them to remember the event.
First of all, the study was unable to get participants to recall false memories in the first interview. Zero participants recalled a false event during interview 1. However, some participants in interview 1 recalled similar (true) memories to the faked event. During the second interview, 4/20 subjects claimed to recall the false events: 2 recalled a fake birthday party with pizza and a clown, and 2 recalled an overnight hospital trip for an ear infection.
The four subjects who recalled the 'false' memories had described similar real events during their first interview. For instance, one recalled a real birthday party, but in interview 1 they attempted to incorporate the false information given by the interviewer by saying 'oh, maybe a visit from a clown, some animal or something came and visited us.' In interview 2 they accepted the false pizza claim and incorporated it into their real memory, claiming they ate both pizza and McDonalds. They say:
>The subjects who incorporated the misleading information appeared to be integrating it with either specific event knowledge or general self-knowledge.>In order for a false recall to occur, the subjects apparently had to access some original information when presented with misleading information.>The wholesale of an event when an individual has no related knowledge or … does not access related information may be rare.Picrel is the example provided in the study. Notably they did not provide a transcript of the induced memory of the 'traumatic' event recalled by 2 participants (ear infection). You can see from picrel that the bulk of the detail given in interview 2 is still of the real memory (McDonaldland, toadstools). I also would not consider an ear infection 'traumatic' on the level of incestuous CSA, but maybe that's just me.
The investigators also note:
>(participants) faced a unanimous majority of two (parent and experimenter) that the event did occur [at age five].For additional context, most people don't have strong recall of most events around 5 years of age, unless they are particularly notable. Note that in picrel, the subject fishes around for a 'notable birthday party' memory and the first thing they say is:
>I remember from pictures … there was a girl named Molly.So they remember the event 'from pictures' and not from their autobiographical memory, which makes sense because autobiographical memory from before about age 7 is extremely spotty, and many people don't have many memories at all until about 4.7 years of age. Sources for this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childhood_amnesiahttps://www.cnn.com/2021/08/13/health/childhood-memories-partner-wellnesshttps://aeon.co/essays/where-do-children-s-earliest-memories-gohttps://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4104227/There was also a second section to the study where they varied the supposed age of the false memory, and they had three new fake memories that were 'negative events but humorous in tone':
>attending a wedding and accidentally spilling the punch bowl>erroneously activated overhead sprinklers at the grocery store>being left in a car in a parking lot and activating the brakeAgain, no subjects recalled the 'false' memory in the first interview. 9/51 and 13/51 recalled them in the second and third interviews respectively. The amount of recall of true events also increased over the three interviews, suggesting that being 'cued' about real memories can recover REAL memories that were previously forgotten.
>Of the 23 [true] events not recalled during interview one, 13 were recalled during interview three, a [memory] recovery rate of 56.5%Interesting! So this study disproving 'memory recovery' actually shows that there is a memory recovery effect of being cued to recall true memories!
Of the 13 'false' memories, the researchers said:
>not all were equally clear examples of false recalls.>six were clear [incorporated most of the false details]>five did not incorporate any of the false information>two expressed doubt as to it being a real memorySubjects who had 'similar background knowledge' (i.e., knew they had actually attended a wedding, etc.) were far likelier to 'recall' the false event:
>11 of the 30 subject who talked about relevant background knowledge eventually provided false recalls, while only 2 of the 21 who did not [have relevant background knowledge of similar experiences] eventually provided false recalls.The researchers concluded that, in order to induce a false memory, it is important to have related memories or autobiographical knowledge similar to the false memory. They say that the details from the false memories were incorporated into existing 'schema' (either real memories or explicit knowledge about past events).
>The more similar the false event is to true events, the more likely the individual will accept the event.Well if that doesn't prove that Loftus is correct that tens of thousands of children were likely to 'recover' completely false memories of extended incestuous CSA, I don't know what will! (1/2)
No. 2568401
File: 1750228412418.png (185.19 KB, 656x385, realvfakememories.png)
>>2568370The second cited study is this one from 1999:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12813354_The_Nature_of_Real_Implanted_and_Fabricated_Memories_for_Emotional_Childhood_Events_Implications_for_the_Recovered_Memory_DebateThe participants all were interviewed about one real event that had occurred to them, and one false event. They were informed their parents had confirmed the events occurred (again, another key difference between supposedly 'recovered' CSA memories and false memories in these studies, because presumably the 'false CSA memories' were recovered without confirmation from relatives). The interviewer gave 4 details about the event, and if it was not recalled during the first interview, they encouraged the participant to go home and remember it before the 2nd interview.
>Next, some social pressure was applied. The participants were told most people can retrieve lost memories if they try hard enough. This differs from most of the type of cases (including Jennifer Freyd) that Loftus and the FMSF adjudicated, because most of them were either continuously recalled or 'recovered' without external social pressure to remember anything. More on this later.
>The participant was informed the purpose of the study was to test the effectiveness of various memory retrieval techniques. The interviewer slowly repeated the event information to bring the person "mentally back to the scene of the event."Remember, they were told their parents had confirmed these details, and they were between 4-10 years of age when they happened (so in many cases, well before the 7-year cutoff where autobiographical memory generally becomes reliable). They were also not allowed to discuss these memories with anyone they knew who would share memories with them (unlike Freyd and others, who 'recovered' or recontextualized memories in discussions with family members like Freyd's younger sister, Gwen).
>68/77 participants immediately recalled a real stressful event that had occurred during their childhood, most of the rest recalled a 'backup' real event in case they did not recall the first one.>10 participants immediately recalled a 'false event.' Their parents were contacted after the interview and 8/10 parents said they had actually experienced an event very similar to the 'false' event. They were then given a backup false event.>Implanted events included: 18 getting lost, 16 a fight with another child, 4 medical procedure, 19 animal attack, 8 indoor accident, 12 outdoor accident (accidents were classified as 'serious').>Of false memories eventually recalled by the third interview, there were: 3 getting lost, 5 fight with another child, 1 medical procedure, 7 animal attack, 4 outdoor accident (20/77 total).>Analysis showed participants were more likely to remember the false event if the real memory was described first.Picrel shows that fake memories were rated less vivid, participants reported lower confidence in them, had less 're-experiencing mental experience,' higher admitted lack of memory (although it was high - around/above 4.5/7 - for both real and fake memories, suggesting the memories were from an age too young to recall anything reliably since both real and fake memories were supposed to be 'stressful'), had a lower amount of detail, lower repetition of details, lower coherence, and MUCH higher 'providing reasons for lack of memory,' suggesting that fake implanted memories are substantively different than real ones.
The authors sadly do not provide detailed examples of what the exact memories are, so it's impossible to determine what they mean by a 'serious' accident or animal attack or medical incident. One example is 'falling on one's head, getting a painful wound, getting sent to ER.' They do state clearly that:
>Clearly, many of the false memories in this study would not be close in significance to sexual abuse.>When asked at the end of the study to guess which memory was fake, 90% of the false memory group guessed correctly.Imo, this study is a little more compelling than the first one, but not by much. On the other hand, substantial research exists that shows most so-called 'recovered' memories were not 'recovered' in therapy at all, but spontaneously either during conversations with friends or engaging with media. For example, from:
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1498258/full>For example, Dodier and Patihis (2021) asked French participants (N = 3,346) whether they ever recovered a memory and in which context this happened (i.e., in or outside therapy). Two interesting findings emerged. First, about one-third of the participants who reported to have recovered memories indicated that they always had these memories but reinterpreted them as abusive at a later stage in life. Second, 90% of the recovered memories that the participants were previously unaware of were retrieved outside of therapy (due to discussions with peers and/or exposure to media related to abuse).>[from the abstract of Dodier and Patihis] Our prevalence results are discussed in light of the hypothesis that many recovered memories are in fact reinterpreted continuous memories. This suggests the claims made by Loftus and the FMSF that most 'recovered memories' are due to pressure and coaxing by therapists is patently false. Jennifer Freyd is an example of someone Loftus 'went after' who had 'recovered,' i.e., reinterpreted, her memories herself with no therapy.
Another more recent study suggests that 'recovered' versus continuous memories of abuse are corroborated at the same rates, and that their recall was most likely spontaneous and outside of therapy:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26158939/>In this article, we provide evidence for a third interpretation that applies to a subset of people reporting recollections of CSA; it does not require the concepts of repression, trauma, or false memory. These people did not experience their CSA as traumatic; they either failed to think about their abuse for years or forgot their previous recollections, and they recalled their CSA spontaneously after encountering reminders outside of psychotherapy. Their recovered memories are corroborated at the same rate as those of people who never forgot their abuse. Hence, recalling CSA after many years is not the same thing as having recalled a previously repressed memory of trauma. The frontiers study on retractors (of supposedly false memories) also notes that there is a very small pool of 'retractors' to even study (they found under 200 in total in the entire literature), versus the tens of thousands of 'falsely accused parents' who were assumed to be innocent by Loftus and the FMSF. Therefore, most people do not recant CSA memories, even under pressure. On the other hand, 'everyday' memories are recanted on regularly:
>to examine the prevalence of retracted memories of everyday events in the general population. Li et al. (2024) examined this specific issue in participants from China and other countries and found that around 50% (n = 698) and 30% (n = 166), respectively, reported to have had retracted memories in the past.I could go on because there is plenty of evidence in the scientific literature that memories can seemingly be 'recovered,' including true ones, and seemingly very little compelling evidence that people, in general, can be made to believe falsely that something as traumatic as CSA/incest happened to them, especially considering most 'recovered' memory happens spontaneously, outside of therapy contexts and with no external pressure. The 'induced memory' studies use significant social pressure, 'confirmation' from parents and family members, repetition of specific false details, etc. and still fails to work at all in the vast majority of cases, with memories as banal as pizza parties with clowns or having a fight with another child at 4 years old.
I just wanted to mention one more thing, which is an article about Loftus and Ofshe, another member of the FMSF who also wrote a book alleging that CSA allegations are being massively inflated/'made up' by an evil cabal of 'recovered memory therapists' who force patients to believe in Satanic rituals. Link here:
http://www.katybutler.com/author/articles/did-daddy-really-do-it/ The article mentions that several high-profile cases of 'recovered memory' were proven to be true/corroborated by other witnesses.
The entire article is worth a read because it describes how much Loftus and Ofshe lied and manipulated facts in their books, but apparently even the FMSF parents mostly did not claim their children had been hypnotized. They just spontaneously 'recovered memories' AFTER attending child incest support groups, or AFTER reading self-help books about child sexual abuse!
>This view is supported by about 16,000 parents who have contacted the False Memory Syndrome Foundation of Philadelphia since 1992 to say they have been wrongly accused. Their daughters (and some sons), they say, developed “false memories” after reading “The Courage to Heal,” joining an incest recovery group or being hypnotized or encouraged to draw or write about their childhoods by their therapists.