If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost)   Everything we know about Kitty Genovese is wrong   (nypost.com) divider line 67
    More: Interesting, Kitty Genovese, Kew Gardens  
•       •       •

11692 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Feb 2014 at 6:39 PM (27 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



67 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-16 10:10:56 PM
wpcontent.answcdn.com
 
2014-02-16 10:48:08 PM

LesserEvil: nmrsnr: Was she raped and killed?

Then I at least know something correct about her.

She was killed, then raped. You have the order all wrong.

The killer also escaped custody and went on a 2 day rampage in 1968, which isn't detailed in Wikipedia.


Actually, it was more like a 4 day rampage which is mentioned in reasonable detail in Wikipedia.  Which is where I first learned that the Kitty Genovese story is more fable than truth.
 
2014-02-16 11:09:16 PM
Did she change her name from Kitty to Karen? Did she trade her MGfor a white Chrysler Lebaron?
 
2014-02-16 11:38:09 PM
Hmm.
Subby, there is no such thing as -0.
 
2014-02-16 11:40:00 PM

ChuckyV: [profileimages.torn.com image 600x799]

Does not approve


Hurm.
img.fark.net
 
2014-02-16 11:55:07 PM

cosmiquemuffin: ChuckyV: [profileimages.torn.com image 600x799]

Does not approve

Hurm.
[img.fark.net image 850x1339]


He rarely does.
 
2014-02-17 12:11:29 AM
Hrrm
 
2014-02-17 01:12:27 AM
Gyrfalcon:

But if you rely on pop culture for your history instead of, you know, actual history books, then what you'll get is the "38 people watched Kitty Genovese die and did nothing," instead of the facts, and serve you right.

What about psychology books? 'cause I'm pretty sure the "38 people watched and did nothing, ergo Bystander Effect" was what was taught in ours.

\can't remember the name of the book, sorry. As I said, pretty sure, not 100% positive.
 
2014-02-17 02:37:18 AM

DrPainMD: TheHighlandHowler: DrPainMD: This is why I paid for firearms training and a CC permit for my wife.

Not in NYC if you're not connected.

I don't live in NY, but you assume that I would let the law interfere with my ownership of guns. You would be wrong.


You assume he was assuming you would etc etc.

He was just referring to your reference about obtaining a CC license.

Sooo... you would be wrong. (And, in fairness, owe him an apology.) (Won't hold my breath.)
 
2014-02-17 02:39:01 AM

OgreMagi: Personally, I believe the police pushed the story of uncaring neighbors to cover up their own incompetence for failing to respond.


Sir and/or madam, you shake my confidence in the public's support for law enforcement. Shame.
 
2014-02-17 02:41:55 AM

Starshines: Gyrfalcon: Most people--certainly anyone in criminology and sociology

Yeah, that covers just about everyone.

FWIW, I've heard plenty of people bring up Kitty Genovese when trying to make a point about the callousness of humanity, or what a shiathole New York City is, or any number of other pet peeves they're biatching about at the time.


Well, in fairness, NYC *is* a shiathole.

/used to be worse
 
2014-02-17 04:02:02 AM
Maybe I'm just too young, but I've never heard of her.
 
2014-02-17 05:15:29 AM

Manic Depressive Mouse: Gyrfalcon:

But if you rely on pop culture for your history instead of, you know, actual history books, then what you'll get is the "38 people watched Kitty Genovese die and did nothing," instead of the facts, and serve you right.

What about psychology books? 'cause I'm pretty sure the "38 people watched and did nothing, ergo Bystander Effect" was what was taught in ours.

\can't remember the name of the book, sorry. As I said, pretty sure, not 100% positive.


That's pop culture. It was the idea that 38 people saw or heard something and didn't INTERVENE that caused researchers to examine what led to the conclusions that are now called the Bystander Effect; but that's not the same thing. You're condensing the entire event plus decades of research into one pop-culture phrase, and that's what people get wrong.

To unsummarize: Researchers were interested in why 38 (or more) people could have heard or seen something and not actively intervened in the event; since by at least one man's admission, he saw part of the attack and yelled down at Mosely, but did not do anything more, and one woman said she "opened her curtains" but when she saw nothing (since Genovese had crawled into the shadows by then) she went back to bed. They wondered why so many people could have witnessed something and not "done something" because everyone was sure THEY would have "done something"; and this led to a series of experiments in which a subject would be placed in a room with one or two other people (researchers) and a mock victim in the next room. The victim would pretend to fall or have a seizure, and the subject's response was monitored.

Subsequent tests found that the greater the number of people in the room with the subject, the less likely any one person was to actively intervene; this was called the "Bystander Effect"; and was then used retroactively to explain why so many people at the Genovese murder could have heard or seen "something" and not actively intervened. It did NOT flow directly from the Genovese murder into the creation of the "Bystander Effect" as people seem to believe.
 
2014-02-17 06:48:43 AM

Jument: DrPainMD: This is why I paid for firearms training and a CC permit for my wife.

Yes, because letting one incident change your life is sane.


My one incident was the Cheshire Massacre. It happened not too far from Sandy Hook, and is far more relevant to individual gun rights, but not as sexy to the media and certain politicians as a school full of dead kids.
 
2014-02-17 08:02:01 AM

brimed03: Starshines: Gyrfalcon: Most people--certainly anyone in criminology and sociology

Yeah, that covers just about everyone.

FWIW, I've heard plenty of people bring up Kitty Genovese when trying to make a point about the callousness of humanity, or what a shiathole New York City is, or any number of other pet peeves they're biatching about at the time.

Well, in fairness, NYC *is* a shiathole.

/used to be worse


Lol...you're from Baltimore.
 
2014-02-17 09:44:12 AM

Atomic Spunk: Did she change her name from Kitty to Karen? Did she trade her MGfor a white Chrysler Lebaron?


are you implying that by wearing a short skirt with a long jacket she was 'asking for it'?
 
2014-02-17 10:06:19 AM

Gyrfalcon: Manic Depressive Mouse: Gyrfalcon:

But if you rely on pop culture for your history instead of, you know, actual history books, then what you'll get is the "38 people watched Kitty Genovese die and did nothing," instead of the facts, and serve you right.

What about psychology books? 'cause I'm pretty sure the "38 people watched and did nothing, ergo Bystander Effect" was what was taught in ours.

\can't remember the name of the book, sorry. As I said, pretty sure, not 100% positive.

That's pop culture. It was the idea that 38 people saw or heard something and didn't INTERVENE that caused researchers to examine what led to the conclusions that are now called the Bystander Effect; but that's not the same thing. You're condensing the entire event plus decades of research into one pop-culture phrase, and that's what people get wrong.

To unsummarize: Researchers were interested in why 38 (or more) people could have heard or seen something and not actively intervened in the event; since by at least one man's admission, he saw part of the attack and yelled down at Mosely, but did not do anything more, and one woman said she "opened her curtains" but when she saw nothing (since Genovese had crawled into the shadows by then) she went back to bed. They wondered why so many people could have witnessed something and not "done something" because everyone was sure THEY would have "done something"; and this led to a series of experiments in which a subject would be placed in a room with one or two other people (researchers) and a mock victim in the next room. The victim would pretend to fall or have a seizure, and the subject's response was monitored.

Subsequent tests found that the greater the number of people in the room with the subject, the less likely any one person was to actively intervene; this was called the "Bystander Effect"; and was then used retroactively to explain why so many people at the Genovese murder could have heard or seen "something" and not actively intervened. It did NOT flow directly from the Genovese murder into the creation of the "Bystander Effect" as people seem to believe.


I'm not sure what you think you just proved, other than the Kitty Genovese incident was explained by the bystander effect, just as the previous person said.

Next up: the complicated history of unerring German obedience and the Milgram experiment.
 
Displayed 17 of 67 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report