4 ms·
I have read the story of Ignaz Semmelweis many times, and pretty much always it is framed as the abhorrent injustice of a comically evil establishment resenting
by brazzy 6y ago
I have read the story of Ignaz Semmelweis many times, and pretty much always it is framed as the abhorrent injustice of a comically evil establishment resenting and destroying a saviour-figure out of sheer bloody-mindedness.
This is the first time I have seen sensible explanations, namely that Semmelweis was really bad at promoting his discovies and successes:
> It did not help that Semmelweis was a tactless, difficult, and angry man who lacked people-skills. For one, years after his research, he refused to publish his findings and reasoning, because he considered it ”self-evident.” Further, he openly berated even the most powerful doctors who dared to challenge him or failed to wash their hands.
- Nasrudith 6y agoReally that is still on society for being so fucking insane that they care more about their petty delusions od hierarchies and egos than lives of mothers. To put it on him is a vile form of victim blaming and tone policing, a tactic of vile bullies to in defiancr of all justice and logic insist it is the fault of the victim for being upset at an outrage. The self evident should be especially obvious given the number of deaths from botched autopsies and self inflicted wounds around corpses. Only an absolute monster would shove a corpse part in the loins of a new mother but they were effectively doing the same thing when even stray cuts could kill. Semmelweis was the only sane man by being so furious. Others were making blood sacrifices to the gods of social norms.
- brazzy 6y agoThanks for proving my point so impressively. That is not how you make the world a better place. You don't change people's behaviour by villifying and verbally abusing them. You are fully prepared to make blood sacrifices to your own imagined moral superiority.