Re: If there would be a way for getting your sight back, would you do it?
That monster study was pretty disgraceful. The fact they chose orphans means they knew they were going to damage those kids, so best there'd be no parents to make a fuss. It reminded me of the Oliver Sacks book The Man who Mistook his Wife for a Hat. I remember being a bit outraged at the way he treated some of his patients like they were objects that were there for him to do what he wanted with to satisfy his intellectual curiosity. They hadn't gone to him for treatment, he'd acquired them like specimens. For instance, there was a pair of idiot savant twins who were brilliant at mathematics, but couldn't look after themselves. Because they played math games with each other all day, he decided to split them up to see if they improved in terms of normal functionality. What gave him the right to prevent two twins from seeing each other against their will. Because they couldn't defend themselves, and there was no one to complain on their behalf, he acted like they were his property. There was another guy who he took from a care home or something to basically experiment on, again because he had no family to fight his corner. And yet the man who inspired the book's title, because he was of a certain class, and had a wife and family, he was allowed to carry on being the way he was, unfucked with by Oliver Sacks.
_______________________________________________ Audiogames-reflector mailing list Audiogames-reflector@sabahattin-gucukoglu.com https://sabahattin-gucukoglu.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/audiogames-reflector
