|
forcedsensuality -> RE: 24 Hours as a Fake Domme (8/10/2012 5:59:01 AM)
|
Constant Stance,
I think you pick and choose the arguments you take on. For instance, I think you've consistently avoided my whole complaint about your ad hominem reasoning that you initially hurled at me.
And you consistently belittle my perspective based on some idea that you have more experience. I've seen no evidence of any experience you have regarding the dynamics of BDSM pick-ups and the rights or wrongs of deceptive behaviour before people have agreed to a relationship, which was after all, pretty much what my post was about, which itself was just a casual drop-in of an experiment i heard about that seemed vaguely relevant.
And just above these posts you say this: "you keep on mentioning some ethics experiment, yet you fail to provide a link with "Oh it was denied due to the ethics so it never happens, no documentation available" - let me point out that is is not how academia works."
firstly, it was not an "ethics experiment" .. go back and re-read
As to the rest, all I can say is that this was how this example of academia did work. I heard about the experiment from one of the people who was to have been one of the confederates (actors). She'd wanted it to go ahead. The ethics committee said no. Since she was not the original experimenter she was not privy to the details of the ethics decision, which in any case would have been a private matter between experimenter and committee which I could hardly have detailed more thoroughly here. So what's missing here ? Do you want the tapes from the bugged committee meeting ? Do you want the experimenter's proposal, because that won't be referenced anywhere since he'd rather pretend it didn't happen now and so would hardly have written it up sor public discussion ? Do you want a handwritten note from the actor who told me about it ? What part of this is not like real academia ? Why would i spill any details here if i had them ? Would I trust you with them ? Would i break the informal confidence of the actor who told me about the experiment ? Which part of this is not academia as you know it ?
A cynic would assume you're fishing for what you know are inappropriate details or trying to find out more about me .. more details you might use for further crude dismissive ad hominem attacks on me ??
so please explain how it is you're not bluffing here .. your turn .. go on .. How is what i've said about this experiment I've explained somehow not academia as you know it ? Do you think I'm lying ? What's the deal ? What more could i have sensibly and safely contributed to an anonymous but public discussion like this ?? What's wrong with my casually mentioning this experiment which seemed somewhat relevant ?
Go on, put up !! No trivialising dismissal that you didn't read everything i said all of a sudden, or that you're tired .. explain yourself !! How is my contribution wrong ? Where would I find a link ? How should academia work better ? Tell me and i'll pass on your concerns to a mate on the university council in that city .. go on, details, not vague dismissals, no more "I know best, so just believe me or else i'll beat you up behind the bike sheds for not automatically accepting my natural superiority !" stuff.
|
|
|
|
