• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Recovered Memories

Collin237

Muse
C
Joined
Sep 8, 2015
Messages
610
It started when I saw an article about the False Memory Syndrome Foundation. It claimed they were founded by probable child-molesters, had hoodwinked the scientific community into believing that SRA doesn't happen, and had gone underground as the "Gray Faction" of the "Satanic Temple". I did some googling, and I found that:

1. Organizations for child abuse victims all seem to sponsor paranoid ravings about Satanists.
2. Everyone criticizing them for their bull seems to be connected to the same source.
3. This source apparently does call itself the "Gray Faction", and does seem to actually be an operation of the "Satanic Temple", the same troupe that's notorious for the Baphomet statue pranks.

So on one side there's a group promoting conspiracy theories as well as apparently doing brainwashing of their own. And on the other side there's a self-contradictory troll farm with a big whiff of cryptofascism.

Am I really the only one to admit that both sides are up to no good?
 
GREY FACTION

Grey Faction is an educational and advocacy organization whose mission is to protect mental health patients and their families from dangerous pseudoscience and discredited therapies, particularly in the area of so-called “repressed memories.”
Click to expand...

From what little I've found so far, apparently this Satanic Temple group was formed in 2012 to troll the religious right, and since then has developed into an organization to resist their religious based agenda. They have seven fundamental tenets.
I
One should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all creatures in accordance with reason.

II
The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions.

III
One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.

IV
The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own.

V
Beliefs should conform to one's best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one's beliefs.

VI
People are fallible. If one makes a mistake, one should do one's best to rectify it and resolve any harm that might have been caused.

VII
Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word.
Click to expand...

They don't actually believe Satan exists.
 
Collin237 said:
2. Everyone criticizing them for their bull seems to be connected to the same source.
Click to expand...

That would be science.

Satanic abuse/recovered memory is more busted than dowsing. If only a small number of people bother trolling the True Believers, it's no surprise. I thought it had all died out, so I'm pleased someone is keeping an eye on the nutters.

As an aside, we have a dead bloke in NZ who died while still convicted under recovered/false memory. Thanks to our peculiar laws, the case for his exoneration is still ongoing.

Those filth destroyed many lives, and put an indelible blight on male teachers of young kids for at least an entire generation. ******* them with Baphomet's horns would be too good for them.
 
No evidence that SRA ever existed: go read some of Jean La Fontaine's excellent work on the subject.

Recovered Memories isn't A Thing either: it's been debunked so many times.

Never come across anyone who works with abuse victims or advocates for them (including myself) who could remotely be consideed an apologist for Satanists of whatever and I'd smack anyone who did so upside the head.

Nor did I ever meet anyone who believed in SRA or recovered memories in decades in the relevant field: yes, some over here did, but most of us laughed at them.

Why are we still talking about this manure of the bovine? I do wonder sometimes if it isn't put about by the RCC and the CoE to distract from their inactions in dealing with the well-documented abuse by their priests.
 
Since when is it acceptable to respond to a concern about poor sourcing by just throwing the word "science"? There are plenty of science organizations that should have the power to condemn recovered memory therapy. These organizations have real, respectable names. They do not troll. They do not proclaim things they don't believe. And they certainly do not set up temples!

The leader of the Gray Faction, Doug Mesner, wrote an article claiming that dissociative identity disorder is a myth, and then staged a debate about it, which looked suspiciously like a sockpuppet show. On another blog, he takes the opposite position, affirming that DID exists, and accusing his so-called opponents of being the ones doubting it. Obviously, he doesn't believe his own Tenet #5 either.
 
Collin237 said:
The leader of the Gray Faction, Doug Mesner, wrote an article claiming that dissociative identity disorder is a myth, and then staged a debate about it, which looked suspiciously like a sockpuppet show. On another blog, he takes the opposite position, affirming that DID exists, and accusing his so-called opponents of being the ones doubting it. Obviously, he doesn't believe his own Tenet #5 either.
Click to expand...

Douglas Mesner is, or at least used to be, a member here.

Perhaps you could provide links to back up your post?
 
CFK, I'm with you on that 100%. Which is exactly what I'm complaining about; sites that deserve to be "smacked upside the head" seem to be all there are.

The article that got me started was written by Katie Heaney just this January 6. (I wasn't searching for anything like it. It just appeared on a side column while I was looking for news about the coup in Washington DC.) She seems to be implying that recovered memory must be real, because the false memory defense is fake. Yes, I know how heaps-of-illogical that is.
 
There's a message saying I can't post URLs because I don't have 15 posts yet. How do I get around that?
 
h t t p s : / / w w w . d a i l y k o s . c o m /stories/2013/6/6/1214283/-The-Censored-Name-is-Neil-Brick-how-Examiner-com-fails-its-writers-and-readers

compare with

h t t p s : / / w w w . p a t h e o s . c o m /blogs/infernal/2020/02/the-false-survivor-advocates-whose-incompetence-helped-weinsteins-defense/
 
Collin237 said:
h t t p s : / / w w w . d a i l y k o s . c o m /stories/2013/6/6/1214283/-The-Censored-Name-is-Neil-Brick-how-Examiner-com-fails-its-writers-and-readers

compare with

h t t p s : / / w w w . p a t h e o s . c o m /blogs/infernal/2020/02/the-false-survivor-advocates-whose-incompetence-helped-weinsteins-defense/
Click to expand...

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...ow-Examiner-com-fails-its-writers-and-readers

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/infer...whose-incompetence-helped-weinsteins-defense/

Both interesting articles. I'm not sure I am following what your problem is with them. Perhaps you can elaborate.
 
The second article, by itself, does seem like a rational argument. I presented it as contrast to the first one, apparently written by the same Doug Mesner aka Lucien Greaves. In the first article he comes across as incoherent and vindictive, in the manner of people like William Barr, Lindsey Graham, or Mitch McConnell.

Incidentally, his "process" logo does indeed look eerily like a swastika. And he's also on record saying something very ugly about Jews.
 
I'm not sure I get what the contrast is supposed to be.

You said he "wrote an article claiming that dissociative identity disorder is a myth, and then staged a debate about it, which looked suspiciously like a sockpuppet show. On another blog, he takes the opposite position, affirming that DID exists." How about you link to those articles, and the debate, because I thought that was what I was going to find when you produced those links. But there was nothing like that.

And he's also on record saying something very ugly about Jews.
Click to expand...

Here you are doing it again. What exactly did he say? And please link to it. I'm happy to convert the links for you if you post them with spaces.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom