Delete, delete, delete!

Posted: September 7, 2009 in bad cognitive science, internets, woo
Tags: , , , , , ,

I am pleased to announce that the circle of wank is now complete. Our tormented hero, dumb, bad, and dangerous to read* Ogi Ogas has deleted his Live Journal!

(Meanwhile, the fans outraged at the stupid that is Ogas/Gaddam, gathered a lot of links here. Yeah, darlings, shove all that information down the pseudoscientist throats, mmmm)

Deleting is, after all, what all researchers do. It’s a ritual gesture of tribute to the dark gods of the internets. Over at Cognitive Daily, a survey is sometimes conducted on the Casual Fridays (check them out! They’re fun, and also give a good idea of what an internet survey should look like, if you’re, you know, not an bigoted arsehole of a hack scientist). Shortly afterwards, the blog is always deleted as a sacrifice to the internet gods, who later restore it to its former glory.

With extra sparkles.

Before deleting, Ogas posted a short apology. Because some people thought the apology was the real deal, I’d like to dissect it using my Super Awesome Discourse Analysis Skillz!

(I’m a linguist)

We wish to apologize for any offense caused by our survey, which was certainly never our intention. We can clearly understand how strong feelings were evoked by the specific nature of our interactions. We deeply regret this. We appreciate tremendously the invaluable feedback we’ve received, and certainly hope to improve our work and grow as people as a result of this experience.

Surprise, surprise, a non-apology. In fact, let’s translate it from batshit to English:

strong feelings = those silly wimminz, hysterical AGAIN.

specific nature of our interactions = we were trying to do SERIOUS SCIENCE HERE YOU PLEBES WAH WAH WAH.

improve our work = so, will the media be sufficiently shocked yet? Or do we need furries?

Also, I’d argue that the first two sentences are a rather weak version of the Galileo gambit. I think that the contrast between “strong feelings” and “specific nature” is meant to 1) be the Galileo gambit and reinforce the impression that they are being unfairly persecuted by their research subjects, 2) make an impression that there is a controversy, because the issues they were researching had a strong emotional impact on many people, whereas in fact that problem was that Ogas/Gaddam were just wrong and offensive. This rhetorical device is also called the false dychotomy.

The person to whose journal I linked also points out how they say they want to “grow as people”. This again reinforces the impression that Ogas/Gaddam were merely impolite and a tad insensitive in their tireless pursuit of knowledge *eyeroll*, and that there was nothing wrong or unprofessional  at all in their conduct or methodology.

More useful links:

Seeking Avalon: Transphobia and Stupidity: has a recap of the transphobic statements by Ogas/Gaddam, and a brief but SFW discussion of the portrayal of trans people in, um, porn, and how it distorts the perception of trans people by people who watch it.

The Neurocritic: RULE 34: What netporn tells us about the brain: criticised the whole affair from the neuroscience perspective. Also, more can be learn about Ogas, who apparently, is mostly known for being a gameshow contestant (wiki entry, SEED article <– HOW COULD I HAVE MISSED THAT ARTICLE SNAAAARL the SEED article further proves that Ogas is a complete fuckwit, because, WHO WOULDN’T KNOW WHICH COUNTRY PUBLISHED THE MOHAMMED CARTOONS FIRST? LOL DUMB, also this:

One aspect of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? that I completely failed to prepare for was my interaction with Meredith. I never even considered the inevitable repartee between host and contestant. Our department does not put much emphasis on social cognition and social psychology—and besides, wasn’t getting the questions right all that mattered? As a result, I was always surprised when Meredith asked me a question or made a suggestion. It was as if I was taking a neuroanatomy midterm and Carl Jung would occasionally interrupt and ask what I thought about the collective unconscious.


On the other hand, HE PROBABLY DID *twitches*.)

Anyway, this just begs for fan fics.

ETA: So, people over at LJ are now writing Ogas/Gaddam slash fan fiction. SERVES THEM RIGHT AHAHAHAHAHA.

*Because you can choke on your coffee while reading. Snarling does that to people, usually.

  1. Elfwreck says:

    This post has been included in a linkspam roundup.

  2. Stella says:

    You missed the very first part of that nonpology;
    We wish to apologize for any offense…

    As if they weren’t sure that there actually was offense, but there might have been.

    We wish to apologize for the widespread offense…

    There, I fixed it.

  3. atwitter says:

    Yeah, I did miss it *facepalm*

    Because, obviously, the offense is in the silly wimminz’ heads, so.
    And anyway, they shouldn’t be really apologising for OFFENDING people, but for BEING WROOONG in the first place. They’re derailing, derailing, so derailing. They’re trying to make it about subjective stuff like people’s feelings – not that that wouldn’t be quite enough – and show themselves in a more positive light, completely omitting the part where they turned out to be an incompetent pair of nincompoop wankers.

    My fixed version of the non-apology would be:

    “We are sorry for all the drivel we wrote. We are now fully aware of what pathetic excuses for human beings we are.
    Shame consumes us.
    The ritual suicide will be scheduled for next week. Don’t miss it as we gut ourselves to attract more attention show the purity of our intentions.”

    I just thought nobody would be interested in me fixing things >_>

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s