She honestly believed until she slipped into her coma that she didn't beat her ovarian cancer because she didn't pray hard enough. She died thinking that her cancer was proof that she was a bad Christian.

I'm currently reading Barbara Ehrenreich Bright-Sided, and she talks about something that I really bothered me during my cancer treatment: the idea that if you just believe hard enough or have a good enough attitude or work hard enough, you can beat cancer. It's why phrases like "after a long battle with cancer" make me twitch. That implies the person didn't fight hard enough. I'm so sorry that you and she had to have that additional suffering. One of the only books sometimes found in the "self help" section that I ever recommend is When Bad Things Happen to Good People, which was written by a rabbi who secretly thought people must of done something to deserve the bad things that happen to him, until his son was born with progeria.

I also think that picture of the Christian God is not supported in the text. The Bible says God sees every sparrow who falls. But they still fall.

There was a lovely line in the movie Deep Impact, when Morgan Freeman, as president, says, "I believe that god hears all prayers, but that sometimes the answer is no."

Bookmark post to say I'm fascinated by this conversation and have something I'd like to add about the definition of "myth" and how I approach that sensitive topic when teaching everything from Jason and the Argonauts to Jesus with my ninth grade students.

But right now I have to grade two more essays and run a study session and go to a meeting and hopefully get home before my poor dog has an accident.

I have a friend who has a bit of a stutter. It's usually only around people she doesn't know well, but it ends up being a cycle of her not knowing people well and not talking because of the stutter and not getting to know people because she's not talking, and it's a damn shame 'cause she's awesome. I may mention this to her, if that's ok.

No problem. If it can help someone else, that's great.

I read an article once about a horrible study that was done in the thirties or so. There were already certain behaviors known to be linked to stuttering in kids -- mostly social stuff like not talking in front of strangers or tending to not participate in games and things like that. The researchers wanted to know whether these social behaviors were somehow caused by something that was also causing the stuttering, or whether they were a reaction to the stutter, from kids being scared to talk to other people because they were afraid they'd stutter. (I did that a lot as a kid -- there were some people who could understand me better than others, and if someone asked me to repeat myself a few too many times, I'd just stop talking to that person. And if there was something that I needed to say to a stranger, like a waitress or something, I'd do whatever I could to make it clear by pointing to each thing on the menu as I said it, or I'd just say what I wanted to say to my sister, who could always understand me, and have her repeat it.)

Anyway, in order to test this, they did a study on a bunch of kids in an orphanage. They did a speech evaluation of each kid, and then randomly picked a few with no speech problems and told them, "You're developing a stutter. If you're not careful, it will get really bad, and you'll sound like (some other kid in the orphanage with a really bad stutter.)" And then they watched to see what would happen. And, sure enough, these kids with perfect speech who'd been told they were developing a stutter started being quieter and hanging back from group activities and getting really nervous any time they had to talk. I think the researchers waited several years before telling the kids what was going on.

there were a lot of shitty studies before there was regulation. Tuskegee is always held up as the worst, but a lot of other shit went down.

Actual info on that stuttering research: [link]

Anyway, in order to test this, they did a study on a bunch of kids in an orphanage. They did a speech evaluation of each kid, and then randomly picked a few with no speech problems and told them, "You're developing a stutter. If you're not careful, it will get really bad, and you'll sound like (some other kid in the orphanage with a really bad stutter.)" And then they watched to see what would happen. And, sure enough, these kids with perfect speech who'd been told they were developing a stutter started being quieter and hanging back from group activities and getting really nervous any time they had to talk. I think the researchers waited several years before telling the kids what was going on.

I heard about that, or read about it somewhere in some science gone wrong article or book.

there were a lot of shitty studies before there was regulation. Tuskegee is always held up as the worst, but a lot of other shit went down.

I often tell some of my liberal friends who bash religion (which I hope no one thinks I was trying to do) who want to talk about all the atrocities committed in the name of religion that there were some pretty shitty things done in the name of science as well.

Rabbi Kushner is a genius...I'm sad that such a horrifying thing happened to his family, but I am grateful to him for using it to write something so helpful.

I'm currently reading Barbara Ehrenreich Bright-Sided, and she talks about something that I really bothered me during my cancer treatment: the idea that if you just believe hard enough or have a good enough attitude or work hard enough, you can beat cancer.

Also the basis of many modern non-Christian beliefs. 'The Secret' is a book I find highly irritating for that reason. The idea that you can create exactly the kind of life you want for yourself, is hugely condemning, on the flip-side, of anyone whose life is less straightforward than this. There's a strong thread of belief, both religious and secular, in society at the moment that says: YOU should be working harder to be more healthy, happy and successful. (As I explored in the dissertation I just handed in, on the subject of medical ideology and the social ideologies it supports. For example, the theme in many UK newspapers at the moment, that disabled people are 'scroungers' because many need to live on benefits. As though that's something that anyone who's ill or disabled could prevent, personally, through their own willpower and determination.)

One of DH's employees wants to show The Secret to his sales force. I tried to get him to nix the idea.