I was Wrong about False Memories
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ก.ย. 2024
- SUPPORT more videos like this at / rebecca
SUBSCRIBE at www.youtube.com...
+++
A new article exposes a seedy past for a skeptic project.
Transcript and links at / 46250170
+++
ABOUT: Rebecca Watson is the founder of the Skepchick Network, a collection of sites focused on science and critical thinking. She has written for outlets such as Slate, Popular Science, and the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. She's also the host of Quiz-o-tron, a rowdy, live quiz show that pits scientists against comedians. Asteroid 153289 Rebeccawatson is named after her (her real name being 153289).
+++
MORE: www.skepchick.org
FOLLOW: / skepchicks
AND: / rebeccawatson
LIKE: / skepchicks
I’m a music teacher and I can’t tell you how many times the students’ parents manipulate the kids into giving them the answers they want. For example... one of my younger students was excited at the thought of playing a duet with me. She is pretty honest with me and always gives her first instinct reactions to my questions (not trying to please me at all, often I get sarcastic answers lmao) but then I get an email from her mom saying “oh my daughter wants to play by herself.” I’m sorry, that conversation was not “mom I want to play by myself” it was the mom saying “are you sure you want to play a duet with your teacher?”
Another instance more recently was when I gave her practice assignments and I asked if she wanted to work on more and she said no, so then I get an email from the mom saying “can you give my daughter more music? She said she’s bored and already played through the book.”
... ma’am?
Whenever the mom is around, the daughter is always quiet but when she’s gone she’s loud and opinionated and clever. Parents really suck sometimes lol
Let your kid live, damn!
Yeah, most people who are put into music lessons by their parents at a young age do not continue playing throughout their lives. The least you can do is make it enjoyable and reasonable so they'll continue for a long time... Not burn them out at 6 so they can forget where middle C is at 20.
There might be a communication breakdown here that's not a matter of "blame". You're student could very well have told her mother, "I'm bored and I already played through the book." as a way of saying, "I don't want/need to practice anymore." At a certain age teens can be an open book to the entire world but bristle at the authority their parents represent. This child is communicating one thing clearly to you, but do we know if she is communicating the same thing to her parents?
@@wellesradio she’s 6 so it’s definitely her trying to please her mom. Also her mom is a bit...much. She has a reputation at our school with her other kids lol
Like she’s very strict with the kid’s practicing and one time when she was listening in on our lesson asked if we could focus on rhythm more because her rhythm was so bad (it wasn’t).
@@SageGarlandSingerSongwriter yeah I always try to make it fun :)
This specific kid is kind of a genius, extremely talented, plays both cello and piano and she’s 6.
@@ameliavelasco8602 Nice! I taught music lessons for a while and it was tough for me to make it fun for every kid, especially because I was working two other jobs and not having fun in music school at the time. Definitely admire those teachers who can make it fun most of the time.
That's awesome! I hope she likes it.
""""Well meaning"""" police officers
Literally just popped into the comments to say this.
Thank you
Needs more quotation marks
I saw this comment before watching the video. Then I got to that part of the video and… yeah.
I unexpectedly had a run in with the cops and had no idea why they were questioning me. They were acting really weird and they wouldn't tell me why at first. They were just asking me where I was at the night before. Finally they said there was a hit and run. Suddenly I was legitimately not sure if I had run over a child the night before. This was 5 min into talking to them. I mean, I know I have never ran over anyone....right? Right?! I was genuinely asking them if it was possible if you can run over someone without realizing it.
Sorry you had to suffer at the hands of the police!
May your experience be a lesson to all that *no one* should *ever* talk to the police without first getting a lawyer. Police will *never* look out for the best interests of the person they are interrogating.
@@jpe1 Oh, I learned the hard way. This was the least bad experience I ever had with them. Lol
I had a similar experience where cops hassled me while I was parked in my own driveway.
I said, "no officer, I don't know how fast I was going."
@@Grim_Beard It's great advice, but not always possible. Casey doesn't say anything about being under arrest, merely being questioned, and you can't be given a public defendant unless you've been arrested. Of course, if you already have a lawyer, you can always get them involved, but people who have lawyers on retainer generally don't need to be reminded of this rule.
Never speak to cops. And do your research on what to say to cops to invoke your right to an attorney and to remain silent. Courts have ruled that cops can lie to you and, i shit you not, have ruled that "I want a lawyer, dawg" was ambiguous because the person could have been asking for "a lawyer dog" (as in a dog who is a lawyer). There are tons of other phrases that have been deemed to be too ambiguous to count. Cops lie, pressure, and psychologically manipulate people into confessing to crimes even if the cops KNOW that the "suspect" didn't commit them.
I was in therapy during the satanic abuse panic. My therapist kept asking me questions like "do you remember being in a group?" "Do you remember any chanting?" She did everything she could to try to get me to "admit" that I was abused by Satanists. I was in my 20s and knew what she was doing, so stood firm on saying no, no, no, but it's so easy in that situation to want to please your therapist, I can imagine if I were more vulnerable, the outcome could have been very different.
SRA isn't one thing.
I’m always afraid that my memories of assault are false memories, but then I remember that I didn’t know what abuse was or that a member of my family or a woman could abuse anybody, let alone me, and that when my mother found out I was molested as a child by reading a journal I kept she immediately demanded to know if I was sure I hadn’t dreamt it or wasn’t remembering it wrong. I remember that nobody could’ve primed me to think I’d been abused because no one knew I even suspected that it happened for over a decade. And then I get sad, because it means that the woman that molested me did in fact molest me and continues to work with children to this day and there’s virtually nothing I can do about it.
I am also a victim of CSA by a female perpetrator, and I relate to what you said so hard. I blocked out the memory for years and when it resurfaced in high school I was a wreck and too ashamed to tell anyone why I couldn't eat or get out of bed, much less go to school. Eventually I did, but I still have those "but what if i made it up? What if I just wanted attention" but then I remember I was getting attention, there was talk of hospitalizing me if I didn't start eating soon. I felt like shit for making everyone worry about me, telling them I was like this because I'd been assaulted at school, a place I should have been safe, would only make them worry more, so why would I do it if it wasn't true?
Thank you both for sharing. I find your stories highly relatable. The self-doubt is so frustrating 😥 I believe you, you are valid. Much love and healing to you both.
I remember showing up at my friend's house once. His sister was really upset. She was saying that her daughter's stepmother had violently grabbed her and twisted her arm. She kept telling everyone this. The daughter was being very quiet. I got a moment to quietly talk with the daughter. In a very calm voice I asked her what had happened. They'd been in a parking lot and had been running. She nearly ran out in front of a car and the stepmother grabbed her and yanked her out of the way of the car.
Yes, the stepmother had violently yanked her arm, and that's all her mother had heard. She missed the bit about the yanked arm being about getting her out of the way of a moving car.
The key is to not lead people when you ask questions.
When I talked to the police when I was a kid, when they caught the man who abused me the questioning started with my mother asking if the man had ever touched me, but after that the police took over. I still remember the officer who questioned me. All she did was ask me to tell what happened. I did. There wasn't any leading. The only time there was any leading was later, when they told me that testifying in court could be very traumatic. It scared me out of testifying and the guy got 6 months probation despite molesting at least 7 kids in our apartment complex (probably more) and likely numerous more at work (he worked with mentally challenged kids). I saw him at the mall once with another kid. I told my mom and they told the police but because I didn't know who the kid was they couldn't do anything. :(
Yes. Child abusers always look like slavering monsters. Always. Yup.
"It's difficult to be a successful criminal if you have a face that 'looks' dishonest." -- modified Doctor Who quote.
The only bad people I know are Evil Lords of Darkness that dress in black and punctuate each sentence with maniacal laughter and constantly say they are evil so that nobody is mistaken.
@@Medytacjusz Actually, I'm a black-wearing, maniacally laughing Evil Lord of Darkness, and I'm really actually a fairly decent guy. I'm no saint, mind you. But then; who is?
@@mooncalf191 Evil Lords of Darkness don't say they are "decent guys". It's in the name.
@@Medytacjusz Evil Lords of Darkness do whatever the hell they want. If an Evil Lord of Darkness wants to prance in daisies, he does it. It only puts the unquenchable black flame of his heart in stark contrast. When a Dark Lord prances, children and adults alike weep in despair. But I get them Ice cream after, so they're scarred for life, but well fed. See? Decent guy/Dark Lord dichotomy achieved.
You get thrills when you're forced to correct yourself, I get thrills when I listen to someone handle a controversial topic with nuance and thoroughness.
^ a "yes, and" situation ^ 😁
Loving your children but not believing or respecting them seems like a repeating theme of the older generation
I fully expect it to always be a thing, unfortunately. I don't think it's simply an issue with past generations.
@@NekoDalian welll i'd make an argument for ageism as a bias that can hopefully, though i'm afraid very laboriously, be fought against as a society. this is what progressive politics is about, and while progress as a concept carries huge baggage, where it remains and should remain relevant (in my current opinion) is in fighting systemic oppression
I don't know what you mean by old, but I'm 64 and my daughter is 31 and an amazing, confident human who knows what she wants, has amazing communication and relationship skills and truly understands respect, which she gives to everyone until they prove they don't deserve it. Since she got into her 20's she has repeatedly had moments where she has realised that the way I brought her up is a significant factor in how she is, a good example being during the Black Lives Matter protests, when many of her friends found out their parents were racist and she realised that the reason she wasn't was that she had been taught from birth to respect all human beings as having equal worth regardless of their individual characteristics. This has nothing to do with age, and everything to do with values! There are plenty of young parents in the US doing things to their children that we know from all the scientific evidence is really bad for them, in the name of their God (and of course they don't believe in science) and plenty of older parents who brought up their children as humanely and wisely as they could, encouraging and supporting them to be who they really were rather than trying to live their lives vicariously through the children.
I can distinctly remember watching an episode of Saturday Night Live at a High School party. I can see the screen, my high school group all sitting around in my gf’s basement. I have believed this as a good memory for 50 years. I remain convinced that this was a great party. I learned a couple of years ago that Saturday Night Live did not air until 2 years after I graduated and I had broken up with gf. Hmmmmm. Yet I can still ‘see’ the memory to this day.
My guess would be multiple memories got blended together in your head somewhere along the line. Could be wrong, of course; who knows. But it would make sense, given how memories are basically re-saved every time you access them, as I understand it.
It's not that you can't misremember things, it's that another person can't "implant" a completely new memory in your brain.
In psychology courses they talk about the study where people witness a fender-bender and the word the cop uses to ask about the impact speed (like crash) alters the estimate they give.
The speed-stuff might be less about memory and more about an estimation. You don't see speed, so you can have the same memory and judge it differently depending on the context.
But the same stuff works if you ask the people if there was broken glass, e.g. if you use the verb "crash" more people will say that a window broke than if you use "hit".
So it might be a memory thing or people actually don't really remember and just guess even about facts like that, which might effectively end up becoming a false memory bc if you ask them again, they'll probably stick with their previous answer
(I hope this makes sense, I don't know if you can follow me)
@@leow.2162 Yes exactly, it alters how they recall.
I heard that one in a psych class too, alongside the Lost In A Mall experiment - I think the idea that you can alter the WAY someone recalls an event is a much smaller stretch than the idea that you can just fabricate entire, deeply traumatic events out of whole cloth.
"Gods will"
Two words which should almost taint by association as they are so often used to excuse the inexcusable, because if one could speak to anything other than blind faith one would surely do so.
Having two children with my wife in the 80’s, I remember the McMartin Preschool story. It was a witch-hunt.
Literally!
Are you sure you can trust your memory of the story? :)
And it snowballed. Suddenly there were child molesters EVERYWHERE. But this doesn't mean there WEREN'T child molesters everywhere; just that suddenly everybody was looking for them.
Literally
@@BrightBlueJim - the Amirault family in Boston was literally ruined when a bunch of panicked parents claimed their children had been molested. It was the false memory syndrome on full display, and one defendant (Gerald Amirault) spent 18 years in prison for something that never happened.
I was lost in a mall (or maybe a big supermarket) when I was a child, I remember just flashes of myself crying and an employee speaking with me but I didn’t understand her because we were in Sweden…
my parents later told me that they left me in the child area where there was a tv and little chairs for children, but at some point I realized that my parents weren’t near me and I started crying… So maybe I wasn’t really lost but I felt abandoned!
“Well-meaning police officers” harrumph harrumph.
And it's a positive feedback loop. The police may even believe that the witness statements and confessions they get are genuine, and that they've found a wonderful way of bringing out the "truth", so they continue to use these very effective techniques. But maybe not - I've been told by a cop that he believed half the people in prison didn't do the things they were either convicted of or plead guilty to. A person being "questioned" by the police will invariably be told that they already know he's guilty, and the person thinks, if these guys are so sure, why would a jury believe me if I denied it?
I think that Ted Bundy story later in the video exemplifies what she was talking about there. In that case, the police were correct that that they had the right person and they "helped" the witness with her story in order to get him charged. I suspect that this sort of thing happens a lot. The problem is that different police officers require different levels of evidence to believe that they have the right person and that level probably goes down over time as police officers believe that their instincts improve but their biases also get stronger.
@@wunnell Exactly right. They did the wrong thing, but it worked, and had the desired result. So yeah, why wouldn't they find themselves less reluctant to manipulate witnesses? Especially when they can fool themselves into believing in their own skill at knowing a bad guy when they see one.
I heard that and auto-eyerolled
@@wunnell the other danger is that their 'help' gets discovered in court, in which context it will represent proof positive that they framed the person, and then even if the person is guilty they might not, /should not/, be found guilty because all the evidence presented by those proven framers is in reasonable doubt. This is what happened with OJ.
I remember sitting in my psychology class, listening to the false memory research of implanting memories of being lost in the mall. I kept thinking how wrong it was, because getting lost in the mall could absolutely have happened and maybe the mother doesn’t remember. It’s.... faulty at best.
Not just that, but chances are fairly high that they had gotten lost in some store at some point, and so they'd likely be calling upon that memory. I know it happened to me enough that I learned exactly where to go to have them make an announcement over the intercom.
I would get lost in stores on purpose, when I was fed up with shopping or the people I was with. Did it several times. Would just walk off and head to customer service and tell them I lost mom/dad/gandma/whomever. So yeah, wasn't exactly scared or worried. Just annoyed.
It’s something that happens so often and is also an easy memory for someone to conjure up a time at the mall when they were young. Maybe they did get lost for a bit?
It’s sort of like how psychics work, they tell an audience a bunch of general situations and details until it sticks to someone and then it confirms the bias that they are psychic because someone related to what they were talking about.
Not to mention malls can be intimidating to children, so they may just remember a situation where they were _frightened_ at a mall, not actually lost. The mom knew where they were at all times, but everything was intimidating and overwhelming. The fear of the memory, along with the sensory input, is all they remember, not the context, so when told they got lost at the mall as a child, they easily could have thought that random memory they struggled to place was _that_ situation.
Like why not something more specific, like meeting a specific celebrity or something.
Maybe the *mother* doesn't remember her own kid getting lost? Did you seriously write this?
I have little false memories quite often. Nothing extreme or tragic, but I will remember taking my medication, yet when I look at my pillbox, I clearly hadn't. I also remember putting things away in their proper place but when I go to look for them later, it turns out that I hadn't. My imagination is so strong and vivid that I seem to be able to convince myself that these little events actually happened.
This mostly sounds like you're remembering other times you did that though. People can easily mix up the times things happened, but it's still a thing which did happen. Imo no more undermining of your memory than deja vu is.
I learned about Loftus just last term in my Intro to Memory course. Might need to send that article and this video to that professor.
Please do! I'd love to know what they'd have to say about it.
Memory
All alone in the moonlight
I can smile at the old days
I was beautiful then
I remember
The time I knew what happiness was
Let the memory
Live again
@5:20 "well meaning police officers"
Hey I found the next belief thats going to give you that thrill
The point is that it doesn't need to be intentional.
Yeah my opinion on this was changed when there was an awful piece in “Skeptic” questioning the memories of people abused by Sandusky. Even Dan Dannett ended up praising it. Yeesh.
I never thought that sugar made kids “hyper”...whatever that was supposed to mean. As a kid, I ate my fair share of sugary treats and never felt any alteration of mood whatsoever after indulging. As a kid, I also observed that many of my fellow classmates would run around and scream like maniacs at recess...before lunch, so unlikely they would have had any sort of food, sugary or otherwise, beforehand. Why must they be so loud? my 7-year-old self would often wonder.
I hate that so many people believe sugar makes you hyperactive.
False memories don’t have to be of some event long ago, they can be false about something from just seconds ago.
Personal example: I was in the passenger seat navigating while my husband was driving and at an intersection I told him to turn left but he turned right. I told him to stop and asked why he turned right when I said to turn left, and he said “no, you said turn right.” I was absolutely certain that I had said “turn left”, I had a crystal clear memory of saying those words (and of gesturing to the left) and I would have bet $10,000 that I had said “turn left.” I happened to be recording myself giving the directions, so I played back the prior few seconds to make my point that I had said “turn left” and was thrown into a state of cognitive dissonance when I heard my own voice say “turn right.” I looked at my husband and asked him, “how did you get in and change that recording so quickly‽ “ (and then burst out laughing, because obviously I had said turn right and was remembering what I *wanted* to say, not what I actually said) I then apologized profusely! I’ve told this story many times and sometimes people dismiss it as unimportant (because the event itself was unimportant) but I will argue that if I could feel as certain as I did about something that had just happened (or rather, had *not* happened) then how can ever be absolutely certain about *any* particular memory? If nothing else it keeps me humble when my husband tells me I remember something wrong.
I do this sometimes, too. I've quoted exact words that parents, teachers, coworkers, etc. have used in arguments with me, only to have them deny they used those words. In your case, you recorded it yourself and were able to laugh at your mistake, but when other people are recorded so you can prove they said the hurtful thing they said, they usually just get more angry at you.
The really tricky part is how to square this with gaslighting.
@@nathanpetrich7309 you are so right about how this plays in to gaslighting! In my own case, had the recording not been there, my husband and I would simply have dropped the issue because of course in the grand scheme it was totally unimportant, zero consequence beyond him making a wrong turn, yet I would have had perhaps a tiny bit less trust of him, thinking that he was denying what had happened just so he didn’t look bad (when in fact it was I who was doing that very thing, though not (consciously) deliberately). But I can easily imagine the same sort of scenario playing out with something of much greater consequences, and it’s not like we can go around recording *everything* we do and say just to check later. And there is also the issue of two people having a different perception of the same event due to different perspectives (I mean literal perspective, as in, standing in two different places something can look very different). Memory is not at all the hi-fidelity, objective, and dispassionate recording of reality that we think it is!
I have to ask a question unrelated to memory: Are you dyslexic at all? I have that same problem all the time. _I know_ which direction I mean, but if I'm giving directions to someone, even right next to me, I'm very likely to say the wrong direction. I know this. It's been a problem for so long that I'm far more apt to simply say "That way" and point. My dyslexia was diagnosed when I was six or seven years old. Back in those days they called it "dysgraphia" because I wrote letters backwards. Mostly P and 9, b and d. I eventually overcame that, but attaching words to spacial dimensions is still difficult for me. (And so is math. Remembering formulae in relationship to concepts is extremely difficult.)
@@tarmaque interesting question! I have never been diagnosed as dyslexic and I have no particular trouble reading, so I don’t think that is related in this case. I do know what you mean about saying the opposite direction from what was intended, and I have done that on occasion, but usually when I mis-speak “left” when I mean to say “right” I realize it moments after the word comes out of my mouth, or when I realize that I’m pointing in the opposite direction of what I just said.
@@jpe1 I'm an excellent reader too. It's a different kind of dyslexia than that. It has more to do with abstract spacial relationships and the verbal center of the brain. But it is very interesting.
I also find that I can force myself to say the right things, but it takes a distinct effort of will. I have to be thinking about what I'm saying. If I just say them off-the cuff I have a 50/50 chance of being wrong, or just saying "Squirrel!"
I’ve always assumed false memories were real because I have so much trouble remembering what were real memories and what were things I dreamed... there are genuinely a lot of things I’m not sure about, but I’m afraid to ask.
I don't think the story of this foundation proves that false memories or memory problems don't exist, but that people who are accused of abuse (and their enablers) have a motivation to claim that people who claim they were abused have "false memories".
False memories are TOTALLY a thing. I know, because I have some. The most specific one is about a scene in a comic book that I remember clear as day but simply does not exist. I suspect everyone has some that just never get verified. Also, every mandela effect is a false memory of some sort.
There has GOT to be a reason for the Mandela thing. Not the "Mandela effect", but the actual memory that so many people (myself included) have of having heard about Mandela's death. I am convinced that a major news outlet got a report of someone else's death, and then got the name wrong. But then, someone surely would have corrected them. It just doesn't make any sense. I mean, before I ever heard about the Mandela effect, I remember hearing about it being his birthday, and thinking, "didn't he die a few years back?"
I've had what I'm now pretty sure are memories from dreams that then got transplanted into the context of reality, making me think they were memories of real things. I'm pretty sure of this as the source because due to how my brain works, I was able to retrace the path of thought to its origin. It's something I can do. I've also had memories drift, merge, and split. I've had things described in such detail or repetition, the vividness of my imagination meant I could swear I actually saw them happen, even things that I absolutely could not have seen. But I've never, as far as I'm aware, had a memory with no relation to reality, experienced or otherwise. There's almost certainly a source. What that source is makes for quite an interesting question, though.
True, but the science and research around it is very biased and done horribly. It shouldn’t be used to harm children or to manipulate answers into what you want.
@@BrightBlueJim it’s more likely that a lot of people mixed him up with someone else or just assumed he was old and dead because of how influential he was.
@@PrettyPinkPeacock I don't think I would ever assume someone was dead because of how influential he was. As for mixing him up with someone else, that's what I thought, but have not been able to determine who else that could have been. The person I've heard suggested as the alternative was someone I'd never heard of, but I don't have any alternative that's plausible.
In the 'Lost In the Mall Study', how did they rule out the possibility that the subject might have actually been lost in a mall, or have a similar memory?
For example, I remember being lost as a small child, although I don't remember where. If I were told that I'd been lost in the mall, I would be likely to assume that this was the same incident, and give the details I remembered. How would they avoid concluding that they'd induced a false memory in me?
Just because your enemy is a buch of witch hunting fools, it doesn't mean that you are in any way or form right. Often people with power clashing are all assholes.
There's a major difference between trying to figure out how to talk to children so they feel comfortable and able to tell the truth and just denying everything a child says because the person they are accusing "seemed nice".
Seems like they went completely in the other direction.... nuance seems to be a rarity 🙄
Also when talking about false memories one really needs to be careful, because speaking from experience.... It's often used to strengthen gaslighting by those that are knowledgeable about it. So I was hardly surprised there was a whole organization based entirely on gaslighting victims of childhood sexual abuse through the pretense of false memories.
Also in all fairness to that article... The whole Satanic Panic thing is pretty famous and well known, whereas the other stuff mentioned isn't. No need to inform the reader about stuff they probably already know about, and if not can easily find a plethora of information about, in an article about little known but important information.
I too love finding out I'm wrong about something, because that means I get to stop being wrong about something.
I really enjoy the longer form content. It can be difficult to find the context for some shorter pieces creators in this space put out and having more of it is more knowledge for the pile. Good shit. Also my knowledge pile will be the biggest!!!
"Children are morons"
-Rebecca Watson Jan 15 2021
This might be the most right she has ever been.
My adult son says this all the time and says he too was a moron when he was a kid.
Many children want to please adults.
True. My Mum thought I was a moron. I was being sexually abused as a child and didn't tell a soul. I would have lied if I was asked because I was terrified about the thrashing I'd get. I tried to please everyone but it's a recipe for disaster.
Lesley Ward sorry that happened to you and there was no one to help you. I’ve looked into the McMartin preschool trials and some of the children admitted years later that they knew they hadn’t been abused but they wanted give the answers the adults wanted to hear. So, I disagree; children are *not* morons and their response to this situation was probably a survival mechanism; preschoolers can’t afford to lose the approval of their caregivers. When I look at it that way i think it shows that children are more intelligent than many adults give them credit for. They “read” the adults who questioned them and determined, through trial and error, what they wanted to hear. Imo, it’s really important to encourage children to have their own thoughts and feelings, rather than trying to turn them into reflections of the adults around them.
It sounds like Qanon is cribbing pretty heavily from this story.
A lot of people in the comments seem to think they have false memories, but this is the problem. The notion appeals to people on a sort of common sense level without them understanding the many other psychological phenomena which explain it without being "false memories". Getting the order of events wrong, combining memories etc. Also knowingly making things up under pressure to satisfy someone else. These aren't false memories. Eyewitness testimony is unreliable because it often involves people who had no reason to pay attention to what was happening, so they can easily make up little details to satisfy others when they know they can't remember that accurately. That's vastly different from memories of abuse. People with ptsd won't have a good memory of things like the time the events happened, and they may also change the story about events later because ptsd means your brain is revisiting that one or many memories of trauma so much it misses other stuff. You won't be processing how you felt about those events either which imo means the first narrative will be something based on how others viewed the event, more palatable to abusers. What's also noteworthy is that witnesses to an event can also get ptsd, but the things their memory might be reliable for would still be things which were traumatic for them, not the person who was hurt. I also am not a psychologist, but I am someone with ptsd and experience of child abuse /neglect.
Good explanation.
Pobodies nerfect.
Edit: holy shit this video is a rollercoaster. Good job gathering info.
LOL yeah i think that edit was pretty necessary my dude XD
@@Taquinqua Yeah at first I was like, heh... she made a mistake. It's neat that she is pointing out we all someti-OH NO IT GOT DARK!
Just fascinating. Did a lot of reading about Loftis’s work. It would be so interesting to see what caused someone who questioned and saw through the presumed facts (a fait accompli, actually ) and put together such a detailed and well-researched case to turn to being led down the path of unquestioning self-serving belief.
Thank you for talking about this subject. I suffer from c-PTSD as a survivor of domestic abuse. Victims of domestic violence trying to protect their children from the abuser (often a father) deal with issue of "parental alienation", which supposedly stems from "false memories implanted" by the the other parent (often a mother). Abusers get access and sometimes even custody of children they continue to abuse, causing more and more damage and even endangering children's life. There is a very informative article by Barbara Rogers on her website "Screams from Childhood" about false memory syndrome: screamsfromchildhood.com/war_against_truth.html
One depressing aspect of that - well, besides the whole concept of domestic abuse being every kind of depressing in and of itself - is that there are legit cases where one parent will accuse the other parent of child abuse that did not happen, and try and/or succeed to keep the child away from the innocent other parent. Which can of course be traumatic for that parent and the child.
It's a frustrating fact that when someone accuses someone of abuse in this way, it might be true so it must be taken very seriously, but it might be false so... well, it's unclear to me what to do to avoid false accusations, since every idea I can come up with would majorly screw over legitimate abuse survivors.
(I'm speaking as the former stepmum of a kid who was taken away and hidden by his mum after she accused his dad of various abuses that were in many cases even provably false, but at the same time I'm a survivor of rape so... Fuck, the world is too complicated.)
If you got sexually abused once in a dark room or something, sure, it's possible you might get the perpetrator wrong. But no one who was abused for ten years is gonna mess something like that up.
You're right that it would be very surprising for someone who was repeatedly abused over the course of ten years to be wrong about who the perpetrator was, but nobody argues that - the relevant question is: could someone who was never abused by anyone come to genuinely believe that they were the victim of this kind of long term abuse?
That's a hard and uncomfortable question. The McMartin Preschool case pretty clearly shows that it can and does happen sometimes. But the history of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation pretty clearly shows that abusers are more than willing to exaggerate that fact to gaslight and discredit their victims.
@@Confuseddave no, that's not a hard uncomfortable question. Okay, well I probably should have specified in my comment sexual abuse for ten years, not something less clear cut like psychological abuse.
What your saying about those preschoolers doesn't apply to the ten years thing I mentioned, because they weren't even ten. Also, part of the point of the video was that people, especially young people, can be manipulated, not that they easily develop false memories.
@@Confuseddave
Also the 10yr example was someone coming to her mother unprompted, as a teenager. Whereas the McMartin preschoolers didn't say shit about it until they were asked leading questions repeatedly. It's not remotely the same thing.
@@Confuseddave a better example maybe is "Michelle Remembers". That's a horrifying can of worms involving an adult woman
@@arianrhodhyde7482 Michelle Remembers isn’t someone “messing up” their account of trauma. It was just lying.
One of your best videos. Nuanced approach to a difficult topic.
Holyyyyyyy shit that false-memory organization was a whole lotta yikes.
*Based on one reporter's story.* I'd like to see more about this.
It was total b.s. the entire article was full of inaccuracies!
I think its important to understand that theae arent memories manipulated by oneself in these cases, and instead of purposely moulded by another. Thats the difference between a parent asking their child if someone touched them inappropriately, and a child telling their parent they were touched inappropriately. Even more so its that child never spoke of it to anyone until adulthood.
that article did the same thing to me, i was so sure in my convictions before reading it. it’s a great reminder that we should always be open to more information and other answers.
Im right there with you! Thanks for bringing up the sugar thing. Perfect example
Bill Pullman - playing Fred Madison in David Lynch's Lost Highway - says something I found provocative: "I like to remember things my own way ... How I remembered them. Not necessarily the way they happened." -Fred. Almost an active self-directed form of false memories. Lynch is my kind of weird.
are manipulative police actually well meaning?
As a synesthete, I want you to know that the kid is right. Yellow is heavier than red.
gordon thomas
Light does have mass. E=mc^2 and all that. And yellow is more energetic than red, so yellow weighs more.
If you go photon by photon, than the yellow one has more energy, and that's what determines how "heavy" it is under relativity (both special and general).
No, red is heavier and sharper and I don't have synesthesia but I feel this deeply and I will argue with you at length for hours.
@@therabbithat THIS! I'm not trying to be crazy here, but I literally stopped the video to check the comments to see if anyone else felt strongly about this. Also not a (visual)synesthete, but I am an artists, and in terms of color value and visual weight, to me, red is definitely heavier.
@@lynperkins9677 As an artist *and* a synesthete, red feels sooo much heavier to me. Red's heavy as the earth, and a deep, rich baritone. Yellow is a butterfly on the wind, and it sounds like wood flutes and chimes.
So random. I'm reading "The Body Keeps the Score" by Bessel Van der Kolk right now and he brings this up regarding differences in narrative memory and visceral memory (like what causes PTSD flashbacks). Haven't looked into the sources and associated studies, but it's incredibly interesting.
"Well-intentioned police officers" you say, as I turn to look directly at the camera like I'm on The Office
Somebody ain't skeptical enough, hahaha
See? Reasonable intelligent people should be open to new information that may change their outlook. And that's ok. It doesn't make you less of a person unless you ignore facts to cling to opinions. ✌🖖
Being wrong is not an option for the prideful.
@@mechanomics2649 yes it is. Having pride does not inherently equate to being ignorant
4:06 i remember seeing this aweful video on Telltale's channel I think of a little girl being accused of having dreams about mermaid's and wanting to be a mermaid. But she was told those mermaids were actually demons trying to enter her through dreams. Then the croud huddled around her and prayed the demons out and the girl began cry ans coughing really hard and "throwing up" the demons. Child abuse. But u get my point.
You're right--skepticism as a philosophy indeed requires looking askance at other skeptics. I forget that sometimes without realizing it... Until I'm reminded...
My comment to another (older) video just yesterday--had to do with your opening here. The refreshing thrill of letting go of old ideas...
I enjoy quite a bit how your mind works!
Thank you!
It's *definitely* possible to have a false *non*-memory - I have this haunting document on my laptop that I wrote about being in a sexually abusive relationship I didn't understand was unhealthy... the date stamp confirms it was written in the correct window and the events in it are things that definitely happened, but while I generally get an instant cue for the memory of writing something as soon as I read it, even years after having found the document, it still doesn't trigger that kind of recall, even if I combine it with other cues like memories of places I might have typed it. It's just... empty of memory.
I totally know the feel! I've recently come to learn I was wrong about a couple of things and I felt the same way, it's a little bit of a thrill for sure.
Read 'A City Possessed: The Christchurch Civic Crèche Case' by Lynley Hood.
Pretty sure the issues surrounding that were only finally resolved quite recently! like a few months ago. complicated stuff.
My immediate question when that mall test was mentioned was, "I actually did get lost in a mall and she had to pick me up at security. Considering my mom doesn't have the best memory and can be pretty stubborn about it, what happens then?" I would definitely take anything like that with a grain of salt unless situations like that are addressed.
Yeah, I guess it's a good thing that the theory of false memory does not actually hinge on the specifics of this particular experiment. I think the folks making comments like this are getting a bit distracted.
Yeah, I was wondering how she would have found a significant sample size of people who weren't lost in a mall at some point in their childhood.
There's an irony to a study on the unreliability of memory of the studied being dependent on the reliability of memory of people adjacent to those being studied.
I'm skeptical of recovered memories, but false memories are a definite thing. There have been a couple of times I have been sure I remembered something, only to find out it never happened or it happened before I was born. I believe memory is something that degrades over time, causing us to forget what happened and fabricate what did not. If that's true, people would be unlikely to suddenly remember in detail something that they had completely forgotten many years ago. I know that the mind can block out traumatic events, and those memories may return, but I believe those would only be one-time occurrences, not something like being molested every day for ten years.
False memories are real but we can't dismiss people as we can't know for sure. We also can't ignore the fact that even a false memory is going to be real and painful to the person having it.
Can we at least agree that, if some kids say they've been abused by a "Youth Pastor," it's for real.
7 or 8 years ago I was flabbergasted when my older sister described being with me during an event that never happened, that I had lied about as an 18 year old. I'd said I'd throw a full can of Pepsi at another car and broke it's rear window but it was a stupid, baseless, meaningless lie to seem rebellious or something. So, for more than 25 years my sister believed me so hard she remembered being there. Ironically, she didn't believe me when I told her it never happened.
As someone who spontaneously recovered repressed memories (I wasn’t in therapy at all), I appreciate this. I’ve had arguments with psychologists about this and I’ve met other people who’ve also spontaneously recovered repressed memories.
It can be just as bad as to insist that all memories of abuse are memories of actual events as it is to insist that all memories of abuse are false. And an "investigator" who's predisposed to one conclusion or another is going to be problematic regardless of what that predisposition is.
One thing to note though, that it's not just a matter of either a memory "actually happened" or was "made up." It's quite possible that a memory is believed to be of an actual event by the person who has the memory, but the memory is actually of an event that never happened. I've had the experience myself-- having a memory of something a friend of mine and I did together, and later finding my friend had no idea what I was talking about. After thinking about it a bit, I then recalled that I had had a dream where this friend and I had done the thing, and my memory was actually of what happened in my dream, but because some time had passed since the dream, I didn't recall that the event happened in a dream and not in reality. Memories of actual events and memories of dreams both age and fade over time, and it's quite possible to "remember" something that was dreamed and not remember that it was a dream and not a real event. And this may be especially true with particularly vivid dreams. And in this case, it's not a "manipulation", it was the honest confusion of a memory of a dream with a memory of an actual event. This is one reason why it's so difficult to assess the accuracy of a memory, as it could be honestly believed and not manipulated into existence. The bottom line is, memories can be unreliable, not just from the standpoint of forgetting an event entirely, but also confusing whether or not the memory was from reality, a dream, or a movie or conflation with an unrelated event. And of course, it's well known that alcohol and drugs can distort memories.
Another wonderful video.
The mass hysteria ( of Q ) almost toppled our country and may still as it did that pre-school.
So important to keep reassessing one's beliefs and allowing for new information.
Thank you for your work.
Thanks for the info that although false memories is definitely a real thing that happens, the "False Memory Syndrome" folks probably have their very own (egregious) blind spots.
And yeah, that Satanic Panic. I only recently learned that it was so much bigger than I'd previously known. I had only known about how it negatively affected DnD and gaming.
I learned from Robert Evans Behind the Bastards about the school where they thought there were tunnels, etc.
(Btw, Evans is great, but he's not perfect either. There's a different episode where he conflates Brian Dunning of Skeptoid with David Dunnning of the Dunning-Kruger effect.)
Knowing Things is difficult.
It took ma a long time to figure out the major flaw in at least the most public part of Loftus' argument. Proving that false memories can be implanted doesn't remotely prove that real memories can't be forgotten and recovered.
If you want a lot about memory and abuse, check out _Betrayal Trauma_ by Jennifer Freyd. Childhood memories of even well-verified trauma like injuries leading to hospital stays don't always stick.
In a book I read about the SRA scare, the author recounted an admittedly unscientific experience a college professor had. When the _Challenger_ exploded, the prof asked one of his classes to write down their experiences. A few years later, he asked them to write down what they remembered. Nearly every student had radically different memories, and they couldn't accept that those were wrong, even though they read what they'd written earlier.
Our memories aren't audio-video recordings: we reconstruct them every time we think over an event. Things we learned later affect our recollections. We conflate events, switch things around, even construct things out of whole cloth. It happens under pressure, it happens by accident.
A couple of harmless examples from my life: when I was younger, I saw part of _Enter the Dragon_ on television. During one of the fights, the foreign competitor was knocked down and used a fancy move to get back on his feet. But, for literal decades, I remembered that moment as him bounce-crouching and doing a backflip. Even now, that still comes to mind. Another example comes from the movie _Santa Claus_ (made in Mexico), from a commercial: even now, I still recall Santa using a toy blowgun on Pitch, when it was actually a small toy cannon.
I just wanna say I thought this was gonna be about the Mandela Effect, and I'm very glad it wasn't. That whole thing being complete fucking bullshit is a closely held belief I refuse to give up no matter fucking what.
I feel like the Mandela effect only exists because someone said it did and people went along with it because it was said so confidently.
@@ameliavelasco8602 - There are people who are so certain of their memories that they'd rather believe reality constantly warps around them so that they wake up in one reality, go to work in another, go to bed in a third, and so on.
@@julietfischer5056 yeah I’ve had those dreams lmfao
My dreams are so vivid I often mistake them for memories but I don’t stand by them when challenged because someone else knows if we’ve had a conversation about something or not.
Thanks for making this video. Lots of people wouldn't want to "admit" that they were "wrong". Debunking your own beliefs is just learning new stuff, and that is awesome. I get that feeling, too.
The sugar makes kids hyper idea being false doesn't surprise me.
In fiction, it's often a metaphor for cocaine. (For example when Bart Simpson gets high from "sugar")
Take a look at brain scan images of humans on cocaine and sugar. You'll be shocked which one lights us up more. Don't tell me sugar has no Neurological effect. It quite demonstrably does every morning at my house, on me.
I wish more people got a thrill finding out something they believed wasn't true, when most people double-down and dig in their heels. I'm going to try and challenge all my beliefs and see how it goes! Thanks.
Did the tunnels in the school connect to Comet Pizza in Washington D.C. ?
_Rebecca Watson: Non-stop Thrills_
I don't get excited about changing viewpoints. I don't think many people do. However, when presented with compelling evidence about something, I will reassess my viewpoint and do research. The last time I did this was when a friend came out as asexual. I was really skeptical about asexuality because I saw it as fundamentally at odds with evolution. However, this friend is one of the most thoughtful people I know. She does not live a life unexamined. So I did my research and realized I needed to change my outlook. Honestly, the process is a bit of a pain in the ass. I can see why many people don't do it. It is like therapy. Therapy requires introspection and an examination of assumptions. It is less painful to just do what you know. People often prefer to avoid pain, if they are not keenly aware of the benefits. Just some thoughts. I like your channel. :)
I have said this to people many, many times because I think it's an important thing a lot of people overlook. When you're confronted with a fact, one that you see has supporting information, on a subject you are not familiar with, it's okay to reserve judgment. You don't have to end every learning experience by filing it under "true" or "false".
You can say, "That's interesting," and if it ever comes up where other people are discussing the subject, toss it out with a, "So I read this fact not that long ago, and I've been curious about its veracity," and let it be discussed. You do not have to make that idea your own, you don't have to endorse it, it's just info you accumulated and aren't sure about.
We do this all the time with people, like someone who's nice but gives you a weird vibe so you file that person under, "Questionable" in your mind. Do that with information. You can still use it, if your main goal in collecting facts is for conversation, or keep it, if you're looking to be informed, but you don't have to sign your name on it.
I'm of the latter, I collect information, the information is extremely useful in gaining the ability to talk to absolutely anyone. And I have a pretty big warehouse of Questionable Things. Sometimes I fact check them, and sometimes I use them to talk to people I know have the answer, and would like to talk about it, to get better insight.
I just wish more people took the time to examine things and decide to reserve judgment until they're better informed. Just make a third option from true and false and store them as questions in your mind. That way, when they pop up in your head, you know they're questionable and can find out the truth.
I really like the longer videos you've been doing lately!!
This was actually an incredibly interesting and well written video. Thank you, I learnt a lot!
In my case, I really was lost in a mall as a toddler - well, Fedco actually, which was this Costco kind of place for government workers - simply because my mother's hemline was the same height as another shopper's and I accidentally followed the wrong mum. Fortunately my mum was only about 20 yards away and found me when I cried out. I remember it like it was yesterday. So that wouldn't work in the false memory test.
Hey Rebecca, are you going to do a video on the Woody Allen/Mia Farrow documentary and its critics? The documentary is quite damning but there was a critique in the Guardian that brought up some good points. It comes down to the credibility of Dylan's video testimony as a child and whether it's credible or the result of suggestion.
Rebecca, I just found the NY Mag piece you cite, and did a quick ctrl-F on it on the name Nicole Kleumper, and it doesn't appear anywhere in that article. Sounds like there's even more, and worse, about Loftus that you haven't heard. She's responsible for possibly the most appalling breach in psychology research ethics I have ever heard of: she hired a private investigator to de-anonymized another psychologist's subject in an academic paper - but this was a monograph about a course of therapy, in which he was the subject's therapist. Loftus, having identified the patient, then did something a lot like stalking, interviewing people in the patient's life, and then published a paper based on doing this. See This American Life episode 676: "Here’s Looking at You, Kid" (www.thisamericanlife.org/676/heres-looking-at-you-kid). Loftus is actually interviewed in there. You should probably hear it for yourself.
16:06 isn't yellow heavier than red, because of E=mc² with the energy of yellow beeing greater than red.
Or am I thinking wrong?
(m0 = 0 for both of course)
photons do NOT have mass, as you point out: m=0 aside from the fact that this has nothing to do with "weight". mass and weight are not the same thing.
The total energy of an object is shared between its mass at rest and additional energy such as temperature and momentum. E=mc2 represents an idealized object at rest. Light contains no mass, only energy, so it’s affected by the curvature of spacetime by doesn’t add to it. All colors are affected equally by gravity as far as we can tell.
Unless it’s contained, at which point its additional energy contributes to how spacetime curves. So yes, if you put it in a 100% reflective and hypothetical mirror box, you would need to add fewer yellow photons than red ones to create the same bend of spacetime.
Of course life isn’t that simple and as soon as you start containing waves you get into all sorts of quantum weirdness that leaves me presuming that yellow would add more energy for the same number of photons in certain configurations of the system and not others, since it’s the system on the whole generating the change and not the individual photons.
Did the studies on the link between sugar and hyperactivity use sugar pills for a placebo? Because I can see a problem there.
Many of my memories from before the age of 6 are in 3rd person perspective. Doesn't means they are otherwise incorrect. Just that at some point I inserted the image of myself into them. So that's just how I remember them now. Not sure if it is true but I've heard that every time you remember an event your brain is actually re-recording it. So yeah, memories will change as your outlook and interpretation changes over time.
This is a great example of the failure to see that in any situation, there is usually more than one way of being wrong. Great mistakes are often made through a blind conviction that we must, at all costs, avoid some other great mistake. If your favourite big idea is all about the importance of avoiding one particular kind of mistake, or injustice, you're in grave danger of fucking up in some other way - which you could also avoid, if you paid attention.
Every time you remember something isn't it that you're reconstructing the memory every time? So if someone asks you to remember something that didn't happen but making you believe it was true... That would be indistinguishable from a faint true memory in theory.
"light doesn't have mass" - points in Rick Dalton
There's a big difference between adults or teenagers, usually very vulnerable through low intelligence or other reasons, being intimidated, threatened or suborned by cops into false confessions and false memories from infancy.
Holy crap, what a roller coaster! Ted Bundy, Demonic day cares, and bad interrogation techniques on kids with low IQ.
I need a minute.
"Hey idiot kid, light doesn't have mass!"
I thought you were speaking metaphorically.
Any poet or song writer could tell you that red is "heavier." 😏
Recovering physicist here. While photons are massless, yellow light has more energy than red light, and their trajectories are influenced by gravity. So yes, you could argue that yellow is "weighs more" than red.
“[Something] I previously fully supported was much, much, much more complicated than I thought...”
Literally everything. (Sometimes you don’t have as many muches, I guess.)
I watched your Jung and Freud videos for the first time yesterday and was considering leaving a comment talking about the False Memory Syndrome Foundation and also the British False Memory Society, which also has a suspicious history.
I was relieved to see this video pop up before I could even say anything!
We don't abuse children in tunnels under schools. That's strictly for pizza joints.
....or cops can just make shit up like a confession that you never made
I'm not sure, I seem to have a different memory of that. Another thing, who hasn't in their lifetime got lost in a mall, desparately looking for a family member? I'm 79 and everytime I go shopping with my wife, we end up getting separated leading to an anxiety filled session with me wondering if this will be the day I get reported missing and found a week later wondering around in a strange neihborhood, having survived by kind individuals who put out food for the feral pets that roam around...
This is why I have a file on my abuser. I have proven my memories by newspaper clippings and other valid online websites that mention him.
there was a study recently saying mindfulness meditation increases the chances of creating false memories afterwards ( presumably because it can induce a mild trance you don't realize that you're under because you don't believe in trances )
One book I recommend that everyone read is The Folly of Fools: The Logic of Human Self Deception by Robert Trivers. Trivers is probably the leading evolutionary biologist alive today. His theory of reciprocal altruism, parental investment, and others rank him right up there with the greats of biological evolutionary science like Fisher, Wilson, and Hamilton. The Folly of Fools book doesn't require a degree in biology, it is meant for a general science literate audience who just understands the basics of evolution. It is both funny, a great read, and insightful both in terms of science and understanding one's own beliefs. Trivers presents overwhelming evidence that we have a predisposition to believe ideas that reinforce our self image and our strongly held cherished beliefs. That's why I think that most right wingers for example really do believe most of what they say. Because it is in their best interest (economically, self image, being aligned with their peers) to believe it and so they do. This is one of the few data points that there is very strong verifiable, replicable evidence for in the social sciences. Just to be clear though: I'm not defending the pedos. In fact Trivers' theory explains why that mother refused to believe her child's stories of rape. To do so would have been too painful. She would have to admit what a terrible parent she had been and what a monster she was still married to.
I was quite surprised to hear a number of names in this video that I already knew. I did some film production work a few years ago with a woman who was in the process of debunking the FMSF and its founders in a documentary she was producing, which is where I knew the names from, having seen uncut interviews with several of the people you mention. I didn't know which way you were going to go on this, and was ready to jump all over it if you didn't mention the incest connection in the FMSF's leadership, so I'm glad you followed the trail that far. But here's the rub: when both sides can be wrong, when do you believe whom? The producer I was working with had memories of, wait for it, satanic ritualistic sexual child abuse in her family and their church, culminating in the burning alive of a black man in his house, and other events that seem equally fantastic. But this was in rural Oregon in the 1960s, making it far less unlikely. And at least some of her memories are corroborated by her cousins.
I also have personal experiences with both false memories (one in which there was a cake at a party I was at that was in the shape of an armadillo, which was red cake with gray frosting, which a friend of mine reminded me could be seen in Steel Magnolias) and also the sudden return of repressed memories (which I won't go into.)
The human mind is just not to be trusted, for many, many reasons.
Anyway, good job with the video.
Things also get trendy after appearing in movies, like the armadillo cake. I remember that being the plan for the groom's cake at my first wedding, but I can't remember how it actually looked (it's been 25+ years now). It may have been mentioned that the idea came from the movie, but I didn't care. I just loved macabre stuff. I've never watched more than a few minutes of the movie and never saw that cake until I just now googled it. My cake was much smaller. Now I have to see if my mom can find a picture of it...
@@HoleDweller I'm not going to lie. I tried for several minutes to remember what party this was at, and then realized I had just told everyone within earshot that my brain don't work so good. Yeah, it was definitely the Steel Magnolias cake I was remembering, even to the point of everyone's reaction when the cake was cut.
And then I remembered my friend George, who told me the story his wife had told him, about asking her mother why she always cut the ends off of the ham before putting it in the oven. I won't tell the story here, but I knew I'd heard that story before, so I asked, "she asked her own mother this?", he nodded. Then I remembered, and I looked at their shelves full of self help books, knowing what I was looking for would be there. I pulled "I'm Okay, You're Okay" off the shelf and flipped to the beginning of each chapter, with George looking at me funny until I found the story and handed the book to him. He actually seemed a bit disturbed, seeing his wife's story printed in a book. Maybe because he had repeated this story any number of times... (By the way, the story wasn't original with I'm Okay, You're Okay; that's just where I remembered having read it, and knew they would have a copy.)
This is why due process is so important.
So, then, unless I'm misunderstanding you, you didn't actually change your mind about false memories... just on that organization.
I can totally relate to this thrill of discovering some interesting facts, even if they turn out to be false. But it also can be thrilling to finally realize that you believed something for decades and it is plain false - but then (am an autist) I need to totally geek out about this topic and need to find every single real fact behind my false believes.
I have a memory of my little sister asking me why I was going to bed when it was morning not bedtime. However the house where it took place in my memory - isn't possible, my sister never lived there. It was before she was born and if it did take place, it was at a completely different location - and it may not have done. So weird because this is such an incredibly clear memory but it has to be fake.
"In 1991, Pamela Freyd published an anonymous first-person account of the accusation in a journal that focused on false accusations of child sexual abuse.[15] The article was reproduced and circulated widely, including to Dr. Freyd's psychology department at the University of Oregon where she taught. Jennifer Freyd later stated that there were numerous inaccuracies in the article, including the circumstances of the original memories of abuse and the portrayal of her personal life. " The story of the Freyds at 9:40 was a bit hard to follow, as you said it would be. The above is from the wiki about the Foundation.