|
Vahakyla posted:You can now trade your bitcoins safely! i read that whole thing waiting for the other shoe to drop i'm glad it didn't, and that cops are being cool for once
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
South Carolina with the cool police things yet again. I almost want to move there no I don't.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:It seems to me that there's a normal narrative for people becoming police officers. I think there are more than one. 1). Adolescent desires social dominance. (Testosterone, again!) 2). Becomes cop due to desire to dominate by wielding authority over others. 3). Wields that authority as to protect social dominance by: A). Responding to individual defiance with disproportionate violence B). Maintaining social hierarchies like racism and classism
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
I feel like part of the problem with police is that we insist on applying deeper philosophical, political, or personal motivations towards everyone who becomes one. Surely some people just become cops because it's decent pay, a strong union, and a great pension? Or because it doesn't necessarily require a college degree or an impressive resume? Or because your dad or family friend or someone had an in and got you in the door?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
Melthir posted:Go on about your in depth knowledge of the inner workings of a police officers mind. So your saying that all those little kids in school that want to become police officers and stick with that dream are really little jackbooted Nazis. Man we can end racism today by just rounding them all up and forcing the people who want to be lawyers and doctors to be cops. I can see what you are getting at, but the human instinct to group things is incredibly well established and studied. Racism is the same as everything else, a cocktail of nature and nurture- to say it's just nurture goes against most prominent and cited academic literature on the topic.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
So is it true that three of the officers that are having charges filed against them are black, or is that something FOX News made up? I can't find a definitive source on that.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:So is it true that three of the officers that are having charges filed against them are black, or is that something FOX News made up? I can't find a definitive source on that. Police discrimination against minorities is all-inclusive I guess.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:South Carolina with the cool police things yet again. I almost want to move there no I don't. WaPo article from March 2: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...r-transactions/ quote:For a growing number of U.S. police departments, the answer is creating safe havens for Craigslist transactions. The goal, police around the country say, is to create public space for legitimate transactions to take place, often under the watchful eye of authorities.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:So is it true that three of the officers that are having charges filed against them are black, or is that something FOX News made up? I can't find a definitive source on that. 
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKypkj9Ggpo
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Is the concept of structural racism that pervades a group regardless of an individual member's specific racial makeup that hard to understand? Also this has been known and addressed at least 25 years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGREnfgojkk quote:But don't let it be a black and a white one "But some of the cops were black too" is a facile red herring from people desperate to keep from talking about race.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:I bet there's a strong link between testosterone levels and the choice to become a cop (or a firefighter). I had a professor in college to specialized in women's studies who did a seminar with our university police (they were run by the state police). During the meeting all these lady cops made snide remarks and low brow jokes much to the dismay of my professor. When she got home her inbox was full of emails from every female cop basically saying "Please god help if we don't overcompensate and act like a dick we could be ostracized, harassed, kicked out, or sexually assaulted. Please tell us what to do nobody will help us internally." The police are more than happy to gently caress their own under certain circumstances. There's a lot of weird pressures behind the blue wall most people don't see. I'm not saying that's ever an excuse, I'm saying that culture is even more hosed than we realize. We just don't see all of it.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Police discrimination against minorities is all-inclusive I guess. Baltimore City is about 65% black and a little less than 30% white (plus assorted, mostly East Asian, minorities). The police department is 46% white, which is still racially disproportionate but not as totally outrageous as some cities you could name. The racial factor in Baltimore is slightly different from most places in the country because it's had a substantial black majority for such a long time that many positions of power are actually filled by black people. This actually makes it a good demonstration of the principle that American racism is systemic and institutional more than it is a matter of individual prejudices. In Baltimore you have a city where black police, bureaucrats, and elected officials on up to the mayor go about the business of perpetuating racial disparities, not necessarily because they're malicious but because that's how American cities work. It further demonstrates that simply voting in and "winning" elections isn't enough.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:I recall something similar being banded about the military: as the military's role goes from killing folks and breaking poo poo to peacekeeping and being intermediaries between conflicting factions, that women soldiers are needed more.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
It sounds like Jim Webb-level misogyny tbh.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Ask anyone whose been to prison or jail whether the women employed as guards were better or way loving worse than the men.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
tsa posted:I can see what you are getting at, but the human instinct to group things is incredibly well established and studied. Racism is the same as everything else, a cocktail of nature and nurture- to say it's just nurture goes against most prominent and cited academic literature on the topic. Racism is a learned behaviour, full stop. It is obviously a relatively easy to learn learned behaviour, for equally obvious psychological reasons, but that doesn't make it not a learned behaviour. No one said it was "just" nurture - no human being learns anything with "just" nurture, again equally obviously, since without all the nature bits providing the framework we'd just be corpses. Especially considering this was a response to someone talking about how that behaviour is learned and the parts of our nature it grows from, your post is pretty stupid and adds nothing of value. I'd ask you to try harder next time, but judging by your comments so far in this thread, "pointless" is actually a step up for your post quality, so good job. Dead Reckoning posted:Considering that having women in the military at all is a relatively new development, and having women in roles where they make regular contact with the local population even more so, I can't imagine that's a terribly well researched or supported theory. GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 20:55 on May 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:I think there are more than one. ...dudes. Please. Not this poo poo. The reality is way more boring. Many people want a decent paying public job so that they can plan their future without thinking about being fired or having to relocate. And not having a monotonous job. For many, public service is the only decent way of making money and not having to work to the day you die.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
I can't seem to find it at the moment but I get a feeling that one of the issues is that you have a lot of people "Just doing their job" and the job is often problem. I can't find it but there was a very interesting study a while back to the tune of "justifying the Nazis." The short of it was that people were told they were going to be studying the effects of pain on giving correct answers to quiz questions by having a button that zapped people in a little room. If they were right you didn't press the button. If they were wrong they got progressively worse shocks. What people were not told was that the person in the room was an actor and no shocks were ever delivered. Over half of people would just keep delivering shocks up to and including 100% fatal levels even after the person in the room couldn't apparently even answer questions anymore. Most people would literally kill somebody just because an authority told them to.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:...dudes. Please. Not this poo poo. Okay, so I may have overgeneralized. People go into careers for a variety of reasons, and they end up taking a bunch of different paths once they're in there. The interesting thing is that there is research into how police officers conduct themselves once they have been on the job. The following is an abstract, but the concept is an interesting one. https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/abstract.aspx?id=50842 The idea between officers seeing themselves as Peace Keepers, Service Providers and Law Enforcers is fascinating. When I was studying Criminal Justice there was another one we talked about : Crime Fighter. The thought being that Crime Fighters and Law Enforcers cause friction in the community they are in.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:It sounds like Jim Webb-level misogyny tbh. The US military is the misogynist one for finding women to talk one on one with civilian women in Iraq and Afganistan; an area where women often are "not allowed" to talk to men outside of their family without their father or husband present?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:I can't seem to find it at the moment but I get a feeling that one of the issues is that you have a lot of people "Just doing their job" and the job is often problem. I can't find it but there was a very interesting study a while back to the tune of "justifying the Nazis." The short of it was that people were told they were going to be studying the effects of pain on giving correct answers to quiz questions by having a button that zapped people in a little room. If they were right you didn't press the button. If they were wrong they got progressively worse shocks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:The US military is the misogynist one for finding women to talk one on one with civilian women in Iraq and Afganistan; an area where women often are "not allowed" to talk to men outside of their family without their father or husband present? No, why would I think that?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:So is it true that three of the officers that are having charges filed against them are black, or is that something FOX News made up? I can't find a definitive source on that. Accordint to David Simon, it's actually the black cops who have the evilest track record in Baltimore. Despite the fact that they had a Grand Dragon of the KKK on their force at one point.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
Hope Baltimore doesn't riot again over this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jTod7ermHE Stay safe.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
That's exactly what I was thinking about, thank you.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
SpeedGem posted:Hope Baltimore doesn't riot again over this. Looks like it was a false report. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...b0c9_story.html You'll never guess by who!
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:I can't seem to find it at the moment but I get a feeling that one of the issues is that you have a lot of people "Just doing their job" and the job is often problem. I can't find it but there was a very interesting study a while back to the tune of "justifying the Nazis." The short of it was that people were told they were going to be studying the effects of pain on giving correct answers to quiz questions by having a button that zapped people in a little room. If they were right you didn't press the button. If they were wrong they got progressively worse shocks. Well that is a sensationalist and totally incorrect characterization of an experiment that was itself sensationalist and totally incorrect.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Well that is a sensationalist and totally incorrect characterization of an experiment that was itself sensationalist and totally incorrect. Best clip I can find of the Milgram Experiment on Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yr5cjyokVUs I'd like to know why you think the Milgram Experiment was "sensationalist and totally incorrect", especially since it's been replicated. Whether or not it was conducted ethically is up for debates, but it's been pretty consistently replicated. People listen to authority figures, even if those authority figures are telling them to do poo poo they normally would not do. edit: I mean I guess you can argue whether we're doing it "out of obedience" or if we're doing it because we can use authority figures to lie to ourselves about how responsible we are when we do bad poo poo, but either way the experiment's pretty solid. TGLT fucked around with this message at 01:00 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
TGLT posted:Best clip I can find of the Milgram Experiment on Youtube. This is the problem with replicating Milgram: "A clinical psychologist also interviewed potential subjects and eliminated anyone who might have a negative reaction to the study procedure." And: quote:However, Burger's intensive efforts to improve the ethics of the study may be exaggerated, are uncertain in their effectiveness, and pose impractical demands. Different procedures used by Milgram and Burger in the modeled refusal condition preclude a clear explanation for the results and challenge Burger's emphasis on the comparability of his and Milgram's experiments Kudos to Burger for the ethical steps forwards, but there is an intractable problem: in selecting people for the survey, you can't select those who you think will suffer from the experiment. You therefore weed out a large chunk of highly empathetic people.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:08
|
|
|
The e: whoops got my torture-the-participants experiments mixed up A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 01:54 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:This is the problem with replicating Milgram: "A clinical psychologist also interviewed potential subjects and eliminated anyone who might have a negative reaction to the study procedure." The Stanford Prison Experiment is likewise a big load of bullshit. "People are inherently dicks" was Zimbardo's pet theory and he set up the experiment specifically to prove it: he specifically gave instructions to the students playing the guards to abuse the prisoners and a former San Quentin inmate admitted to feeding the "guards" ideas on abuse. The students were also wanting to please the teacher, as he was an authority figure and they were being paid $15 a day (about $87 a day in today's money) to participate in it. It was also being done with young college students (a group not exactly known for conservative values) in the immediate wake of clashes with protesters (including one at Stanford itself that involved tear gas), so the students would be inherently biased to want to prove that authority figures are inherently evil. And of course, Zimbardo didn't talk about the guards who actually helped and cared for the prisoners. It didn't fit his hypothesis and he's a lovely scientist.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:22
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:This is the problem with replicating Milgram: "A clinical psychologist also interviewed potential subjects and eliminated anyone who might have a negative reaction to the study procedure." Maybe, but that doesn't invalidate the results of the original experiment. I mean, there's also the element of replicating it some decades after it happened. Adherence to authority is, presumably, not some sort of wholly inborn and static trait. Also it'd be nice if you cited where you got that quote from, Reflections on "Replicating Milgram", but I found it. The article also talks about the fact that they reduced how many volts they "sent" to the learner, not just that they filtered out empathetic individuals. Nor in the original test did all those sorts of people quit giving shocks - to quote that article "Powerfully, they revealed that participants would, in certain situations, exhibit very high rates of obedience while simultaneously experiencing extreme discomfort and personal misgivings regarding their own behavior." Which also goes to sort of knock down the idea that people are using authority as an excuse to just act out. It's not a perfect replication, but a pretty good one, that seems to back up the original results that people will do some nasty poo poo if authority figures tell them to. edit: It also cites some more interesting research into people being lovely because higher ups told them to be lovely. TGLT fucked around with this message at 01:37 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:22
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:The Milgram experiment had a sample size of one. I'm curious as to what you mean by this. The experiment that most people talk about when they say "Milgram experiment" is this one, which claims to have had 40 subjects. Are you aware of this number being fraudulent, or are you talking about a different experiment, or something else?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:30
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:The Milgram experiment had a sample size of one. http://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html?PageSpeed=noscript quote:Volunteers were recruited for a lab experiment investigating “learning” (re: ethics: deception). Participants were 40 males, aged between 20 and 50, whose jobs ranged from unskilled to professional...
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
TGLT posted:Maybe, but that doesn't invalidate the results of the original experiment. I mean, there's also the element of replicating it some decades after it happened. Adherence to authority is, presumably, not some sort of wholly inborn and static trait. Again, this did not 'replicate' it. And the original experiment has a number of problems with it as well, including participant selection. No reasonable social science is based of a single experiment. The quote is from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19209960 I thought I'd cited it. quote:It's not a perfect replication, but a pretty good one, that seems to back up the original results that people will do some nasty poo poo if authority figures tell them to. It's not a very good one at all, no, because the pool of people is specifically altered. This is a constraint of ethical testing. Just like we can't actually test who would murder a child we have tied up in a broom closet for a million dollars, we can't ethically perform any faithful version of the Milgram experiment. Beyond that, the experiment is always going to have--necessarily has--observer effect. I don't know why people are so fascinated by it. Edit: Just to be absolutely clear: In the modern ethical scene, you have to remove people from the experiment if you think they would be psychologically harmed by torturing someone else via electrical shocks. Obdicut fucked around with this message at 01:37 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:It's not a very good one at all, no, because the pool of people is specifically altered. This is a constraint of ethical testing. Just like we can't actually test who would murder a child we have tied up in a broom closet for a million dollars, we can't ethically perform any faithful version of the Milgram experiment. Beyond that, the experiment is always going to have--necessarily has--observer effect. I don't know why people are so fascinated by it. Rather than argue about one specific study, there are others to refer to that were more contemporaneous and less concerned with an ethical approach than Burger. Blass's "The Milgram Paradigm After 35 Years" has a nice list on page 12/966 of experiments which replicated the Milgram Paradigm, although specifically experiments to determine if there was a difference between male/female levels of obedience. Some, like Sheridan and King, actually used a (much smaller) real shock on an animal. As far as I know, those studies listed there did not filter out participants over potential ethical concerns, but if you know otherwise I'd like to know that.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
The Milgram experiment didn't demonstrate obedience to authority, it demonstrated people's willingness to trust a so-called expert over their own intuitive judgement. They were only able to coax people into giving the shocks by having someone posing as an expert give them repeated assurances that the person on the other end was really okay and no harm was coming to them, this isn't the same as "just following orders". Under most circumstances we call this a good thing and laugh at the anti-intellectualism of people who want to go by their gut feelings instead of listening to people like scientists. edit: Also, like Zimbardo, Milgrim was an rear end who didn't set out to do an experiment, he set out to prove his pet theory.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Except that this has been a thing for at least a hundred years in various countries, so there's probably some data out there. Pakistan has had women in combat roles since 1947 or so, for example. Denmark has had women in combat positions since 1980s, giving us direct experience with women intentionally on the ground in combat roles in places like Iraq.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:25
|
|