Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

academic.oup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 704 posts

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#441

Post by pessimizer »

The fact that NXIVM could successfully suppress crippling Tourette's in a number of cases has to at least mean that Tourette's itself (or some subset of what is grouped under Tourette's) isn't strictly biological.

It seems this was done through Nancy Salzman's application of the NLP voodoo she had used as a chronic pain therapist, and possibly boosted by immense pressure to not tic or else be seen as both a failure and a PR danger to the cult. However it was done, it was clearly successful. Are there any studies about "actual" (non-internet video related) Tourette's patients transmitting tics to each other?

https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/overthinking-tv/20...

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#442

Post by monkeydreams »

While this article and many like it suggest a sudden rise in cases due to a 2021 Youtube influencer, this was already spreading in 2020. Girls in my daughter's social network were displaying tic behaviour in the months after the first major lockdowns.

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#443

Post by pessimizer »

maxbond wrote: post #50
Veen wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine many people have a specific phenomenon in mind which they will avoid mentioning because it's considered impolite and impolitic.

Either it is a real issue, in which case, we should have a discussion about it. Or it is not a real issue, in which case, it is not worth vagueposting about. Taking the most charitable interpretation, this creates cover for dog whistling while not adding to the conversation. The other possibility is that it is dog whistling in order to promote bigotry.

So either discuss it directly and be a bigot, talk around it and be a bigot, or silence all discussion about it and be a hero.

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#444

Post by pessimizer »

gadders wrote: post #26

I don't think this is the only mass sociogenic illness affecting young girls currently....

> the only mass sociogenic illness affecting young girls

Is it a mass illness, or a semi-rational reaction to the prospect of facing life as a female in our society?

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#445

Post by yarg »

Invictus0 wrote: post #410
screye wrote: post #395

I wonder how similar this is to (sexy baby) valley girl upspeak & vocal fry. Many young women picked this up from the Kardashians/Paris Hilton and now cannot "turn it off". We know this is not their 'natural' voice because if you ask them to make weird sounds and then a normal voice, then their normal voice sounds completely different than the sexy baby voice. The weird thing is that the women themselves are surprise…

Curious: What is the sexy baby voice? And where can I see this weird sounds and then normal voice experiment?

Think Marilyn Monroe/Betty Boop.

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#446

Post by maxbond »

zozbot234 wrote: post #363
maxbond wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't ambiguous if you consider the entire comment, where they go on to clarify what they mean by invoking a naturalism fallacy and contrasting it with other identities (which they clearly describe in pejorative terms as "abnormal" and "misleading" with an overall tone of derision). Of course I acknowledge that most people are heterosexual, that's such misrepresentation of what I'm saying (including that I've dire…

But what I'm taking issue with is merely your claim of heteronormativity as a "set of beliefs and attitudes" that one can ascertain in anything like a consistent way. If compadrazgo and sworn brotherhood are too exotic for you, consider contemporary "bro" subculture; is it heteronormative? Some people might certainly claim as much, calling it especially misogynistic. Yet it also reportedly involves a lot of emotional…

If you'd like to explain why we should demand that a label describing a set of human behaviors be entirely consistent in order to be considered, when the human behaviors we're describing are frequently inconsistent and contradictory (but still real and worth discussing), then I'm happy to respond. I don't see anything wrong with your examples, I'm not familiar with compadrazgo or sworn brotherhood but I'd be willing to learn more (and until such a time as I read up on them am willing to take what you say about them on face value), I think bro culture is a super interesting thread to tug on and an incisive choice on your part, but if you repeat your argument without engaging with mine, I don't see what you expect me to do other than repeat myself (which I respectfully decline to do).

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#447

Post by abfan1127 »

screye wrote: post #398
pjc50 wrote: post #142

(content warning) It's not commonly discussed, but suicide seems to be a "sociogenic illness" in that reporting on suicides as such can cause more suicides. You may have noticed this in the reporting on celebrity deaths; a young person who "dies suddenly" may be suicide, but news reports will tend to avoid saying that out of concern for the sociogenic effects.

I have anecdotally noticed this too. My university went 6 years without a suicide, and then had 3 highly publicized suicides over the year. They then put in a lot of effort to bury it as much as possible, students went home for the summer, and the university had a few suicide-free years right after

those suicides could also be Black Swan events, very rare, nothing done actually did anything. But human behavior is weird, so who knows.

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#448

Post by Karawebnetwork »

zozbot234 wrote: post #427
Karawebnetwork wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-binary simply mean that you do not identify with the two currently accepted gender identity or that you do not perceive gender as a binary system but as a spectrum. That's it. It does not mean that the person suffers from gender dysphoria or that they want to transition. For many, it's simply a way to describe their existing social behavior. It is also an umbrella word that houses many other identies. I'd also ch…

"Non-binary" is commonly described as a trans identity, and the word "trans" is etymologically related to "transition". If there really was nothing else to it than the truism that "gender is not merely a binary system but a spectrum", no one would be talking about non-binary as an identity of its own - since this has been a consensus POV for decades.

It is not tran[sition]gender. It is the "trans-" Latin prefix meaning "across", "beyond" or "on the other side of" + gender.

In other words, people who moved on from the gender assigned to them at birth.

Some non-binary people identify as transgender but not all of them do. Just like non-binary is both an umbrella term and a spicific gender identity, transgender is both an umbrella term and a specific gender identity. You'll often see the shorthand "trans*" to describe the umbrella term and the shorthand "enby" to describe the specific gender identity.

Examples of clear gender identities that are not used as umbrella terms are: trans women, trans men, genderfluid, agender, demigirl, etc.

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#449

Post by throwaway743 »

hotpotamus wrote: post #419
Invictus0 wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious: What is the sexy baby voice? And where can I see this weird sounds and then normal voice experiment?

30 Rock had a good example of the whole act https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nm-ZF9AfN40

Off topic, but Hannibal rules

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#450

Post by coding123 »

screye wrote: post #395

I wonder how similar this is to (sexy baby) valley girl upspeak & vocal fry. Many young women picked this up from the Kardashians/Paris Hilton and now cannot "turn it off". We know this is not their 'natural' voice because if you ask them to make weird sounds and then a normal voice, then their normal voice sounds completely different than the sexy baby voice. The weird thing is that the women themselves are surprise…

Probably also, gay voice. I'm pretty sure a lot of young (not yet gay) men don't have that voice until later in life.
Post reply on HN