neuroinfo.net

The Islamic State beheads fellow Sunnis who betrayed their cause.

Evil ISIS Executioner Who Beheaded Dozens Of Men And Famously Dismembered Children Has Been CAPTURED By The Syrian Army.

Home | Index of articles

----

Tongkat ali is widely referred to as a “home-grown Viagra” in Malaysia due to its ability to enhance sexual desire.

----

The Future of Brain Transplants

Need a new body part? Tissue engineers are now growing human bladders, lungs, and other organs in the lab with the hope that, someday soon, such organs may replace diseased organs in people. Transplant surgeons, for their part, routinely place donated kidneys, hearts, and other organs into patients whose own organs are failing. They have transplanted hands, arms, even, famously, a face.

This has left me wondering, where does the brain come into all this? Will we someday grow replacement brains or do whole-brain transplants? Three questions leap to mind: Why would we? Could we? And should we?

I must admit to feeling a bit squeamish with the whole idea, which you might agree has a sizeable "yuck" factor. And I felt a little sheepish when I called experts to ask them about it. Would they dismiss me out of hand, beseeching me not to waste their time with a subject best left to science-fiction writers? But with science and medicine advancing at a dizzying pace, and with questionable medical procedures of the past as cautionary tales, it seemed like a subject worth addressing, if only perhaps to reject it as untenable, unconscionable, or simply too ghastly to contemplate.

WHY WOULD WE?

First of all, why? What medical justification could exist for growing a new brain, or part of one, and placing it in someone whose own brain, or part of it, was removed?

"Certainly there are situations where people have tumors and have to have areas resected or situations where people are brain-dead," says Doris Taylor, whose tissue-engineering lab at the University of Minnesota's Stem Cell Institute is experimenting with growing entire replacement organs, including 70 livers last year alone. "Certainly there are situations where somebody has an accident that leaves their brain stem injured. Would it be nice to be able to regrow the appropriate regions? Absolutely. Talk to any paraplegic or quadriplegic out there. They would love to have new cervical neurons or brain-stem regions."

Other researchers echoed Taylor's sentiments—that the future of brain tissue engineering likely concerns small pieces, not the whole enchilada.

"We're not going to make whole brains in a dish and then just transplant them," says Evan Snyder, head of Stem Cells and Regenerative Biology at the Sanford-Burnham Medical Research Institute in California. "But what people are playing with is, is it possible to do little bits of tissue engineering in a dish and then put these tissues into small areas [of the body] and see whether you can make some connections?" Perhaps help a patient with Parkinson's disease regain some lost neural functionality, say, or buy a quadriplegic another segment of spinal cord function such that she can breath a little better on her own or can now move her thumbs—that's the hope, Snyder says.

What about transplanting existing brains from one individual to another, like we do with donated hearts or kidneys? Under what scenario would we consider that? About a decade ago, Dr. Robert White, a neurosurgeon at Case Western Reserve University, received a burst of media attention by advocating what he called "whole-body transplants" for quadriplegics. (Because the brain can't function without the head's wiring and plumbing, White noted, a brain transplant, at least initially, would be a head transplant. And, perhaps because of the yuck factor, he preferred to call such an operation a whole-body transplant.)

Quadriplegics often die prematurely of multiple-organ failure, White said. If surgeons could transfer the healthy body of a donor, such as a brain-dead individual or someone who has just died of a brain disease, to the healthy head of a quadriplegic, they could prolong that patient's life. Brain-dead patients already serve as multiple-organ donors, so a whole-body transplant is not as macabre as it might at first sound, White argued.

I tracked down Dr. White, who is now retired after 60 years as a brain surgeon but is still active as a writer and consultant. "I think this is an operation of the future," he told me on the phone. "But it is certainly out there, and under these circumstances [of quadriplegia], the concept of giving somebody who is important or quite young a new body is not beyond comprehension." And it should be discussed now, White feels, because it may well be coming. "We're still within just the first 100 years of transplantation," he said. "Who knows where we'll be after another 100 years?"

COULD WE GROW NEW BRAINS?

Let's say for the sake of argument that we had sound medical reasons for doing such procedures. Could we, technically speaking? Could we grow a whole human brain, or even part of one, in a laboratory?

"There is now data showing that if you put stem cells in an area of brain injury that the cells actually home into the injured brain area, and they can take up residence there and exhibit some sort of functionality," says Tony Atala, director of the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine and head of one of the premier tissue-engineering labs in the country. "But building a whole brain? That's kind of out there." How about a single lobe? "That would be extremely complex to do," he said. "As a scientist, you never say never, because you never know what will be within the realm of possibility several centuries from now. But certainly to replace a lobe today, that would be science fiction with current technology."

Doris Taylor was more willing to speculate but was also cautious. "We can decellularize the brain," she told me, referring to her lab's technique to chemically strip all cells from donor organs, leaving a kind of cell-less scaffold that can be seeded with stem cells and "regrown." "But whether it's possible to restore brain cells appropriately, who knows?" She paused. "And in the case of the brain, how would you know? There's such a wide spectrum of behavior and functioning. I'm not sure we'd ever have an end point to know how to measure." She paused again. "I have no doubt that we can rebuild at least some neural pathways. The question is, will that rebuild a brain, including everything you need for mind-brain function, or even a piece thereof? I really don't know."

Taylor envisions more modest steps forward, such as rebuilding small parts of the brain to decrease the size or frequency of seizures in an epileptic or to help restore some functionality in a stroke victim who had suffered severe neurologic loss. "I could imagine considering growing regions of brains to graft in," she says. "But are we within five to ten years of that? That's hard to imagine."

Research with neural stem cells has shown that it's extremely hard to make even the simplest neuronal connections, much less regenerate neurons, as had been hoped early on. "The vision of the stem cell field 20 years ago was you have a patient in a wheelchair and you stick a stem cell into his brain or spinal cord, and he'll come bounding out of his wheelchair and run the Boston Marathon," Snyder says. "We know now that's not the way it's going to happen."

COULD WE TRANSPLANT EXISTING BRAINS?

What about a head transplant—or, if you prefer, a whole-body transplant? Doable? White thinks it is, even as he acknowledges that the financial costs would be prohibitive.

"I've had plenty of time to think about it, and the operation itself, although complex, really involves structures in and about the neck," White told me. "You're not cutting into the brain, and you're not cutting into the body, just severing everything at the neck. It's a very complex operation, because you have to make sure that the body's kept alive and the head's kept alive. But this has all been worked out in smaller animals."

Forty years ago, in studies that to some commentators smacked of Dr. Frankenstein, White and his team experimented with transplanting the newly detached head of a live rhesus monkey onto the body of another monkey that had just had its head removed. The longest-lived such hybrid, which reportedly showed unmistakable signs of consciousness, lasted eight days.

"With the significant improvements in surgical techniques and postoperative management since then," White wrote in a 1999 Scientific American article, "it is now possible to consider adapting the head-transplant technique to humans." White acknowledges that a quadriplegic who got a new body today would remain paralyzed below the neck, because successfully reconnecting the brain to the spinal column remains beyond our reach.

"That's a very interesting scenario," Taylor said when I brought up White's idea. But would it work? "Well, technically, people can do almost anything," she said. "You can sew something the size of or smaller than a human hair, so technically I could imagine that working. But there are huge things we still don't know and have to learn. That doesn't mean that I can't imagine doing all of this. It does mean that I'm going to ask some difficult questions before I say it's ready for prime time or even clinical utility."

Snyder was also willing to consider possibilities, though for him the yuck factor loomed large. The first step, he felt, would have to be the ability to sustain a head independent of a body, even for a short period. "Could you keep an isolated human head alive such that it's thinking and talking and all we need to do is perfuse it with the right chemicals and the right nutrients and keep the acid-base balance fine?" he said. "That's creepy. Very creepy." Agreed, but how soon? "I can't say it's absolutely impossible," he said. "But I don't see that happening in the next 100 years."

SHOULD WE TRANSPLANT EXISTING BRAINS?

One expert who has given a lot of thought to the notion of head transplants—and was not a bit hesitant to talk about them—is Paul Root Wolpe, a bioethicist at the Emory Center for Ethics at Emory University. (In fact, he once debated White on the subject on radio.)

Wolpe has several problems with the concept, he told me. One concerns use of resources. Referring to a putative head transplant, he said, "The desperate attempt to keep individuals alive using more and more resources seems to me to be extraordinarily misguided when you're talking about a world where people are dying for lack of resources, very preventable kinds of diseases and issues like malnutrition." The idea that it could prolong the life of someone deemed important did not sit well with him. "I'm always wary of the valuable-people argument—'Forget keeping not-valuable people alive, that's kind of a waste, but what if we could keep valuable people alive?' I have a lot of trouble when I put the argument that way." Wolpe would consider a whole-body transplant, he says, "a fundamental ethical transgression."

Another concerns a person's bodily integrity. "You are talking about a fundamental kind of change whereby a body becomes simply a means of supporting a head, where your sense of what it means to be a whole human being has been compromised in a very new way," he says. Wolpe believes this change to be intrinsically different than that brought about by heart transplants, which, when such operations first started taking place, did raise a host of questions in people's minds about what it would mean for a recipient's sense of wholeness.

One's very sense of selfhood would be at stake, Wolpe argues. In the West we tend to think of the brain as the locus of self, but culturally that is a very new idea, and it's still not shared in many cultures, he says. Consider Japan, where the locus of self is thoracic and abdominal. "That's why when you commit seppuku you disembowel yourself, you don't cut your head off, because you're attacking yourself at the seat of selfhood," he told me.

The notion that if you put his head on someone else's body that the resulting individual would be him and not the other person simply because the hybrid had his brain is, Wolpe says, "theory not fact, a philosophical position rather than a scientific reality. What you may end up finding is that when you transfer a brain from one body to another, the resulting organism is not solely what one would think of as the person whose brain it was but also has enormous components of the person into whose body it goes."

Altogether, the ethical issues surrounding head transplantation are insurmountable, Wolpe feels.

SHOULD WE GROW NEW BRAINS?

As for growing brains, Wolpe has a hard time seeing how you could justify it medically. "Who do we grow a new brain for? Do we grow it for someone with Alzheimer's? Do we grow it for someone with a severe brain tumor?" I didn't need to ask him to speculate. "Say you had a severe brain tumor, and I took a stem cell from you and I grew a new brain for you and got rid of your old brain and put in your new brain, none of you would be there. Your memories, your ideas, your thoughts, your thinking of your wife as your wife and your kids as your kids—it's all gone, unless we can also transfer all your memories, thoughts, and ideas to a new brain.

"So I'm not even sure what a brain transplant means in that context," he continued. "It means wiping the slate clean and now having a pre-birth-level brain in a 60-year-old person or whatever? I'm not sure of the medical problem that that solves."

----

When asked if they would like to have sex with me, 30 percent of women said, 'Yes', while the other 70 percent replied, 'What, again?'."

Former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi, 2011

----

Got the balls? Men are super-sizing their testicles with this bizarre new procedure

Most lads worry about the look and feel of their penis, which can make them less confident in the sack. But now men are shifting attention away from their schlongs and towards their scrotums.

A certain testicle-boosting injection is the latest cosmetic surgery fad that lads are flocking to have – and forking over £2,800 in the process.

The procedure involves squirting botox into the scrotum – leading the trend to be dubbed “scrotox” and “balltox” – in a bid to get a lower hanging and more relaxed-looking ballsack.

Scrotox doesn’t just decrease sweating and reduce the wrinkled appearance of lads’ testicles, it also boosts their size.

It seems men are paying more and more attention to their looks and the number of guys going under the knife in the quest for beauty has doubled in the last decade.

But scrotox isn’t the only bizarre cosmetic operation to hit the market, with men also seeking to increase their girth down below by injecting their own fat into their schlongs.

The procedure takes around 45 minutes and will set you back £4,500 but you have abstain from sex for six weeks to let the penis heal.

As for the results of the manhood makeover, don’t expect to stretch more than one inch wider than you were before.

Speaking exclusively to Dailystar.co.uk, certified plastic surgeon Dr David Alessi explained the long-term effects of the procedure are often less than desirable.

“Unfortunately, upwards of 90% of men are dissatisfied with the results,” he said.

The medic, who founded the Alessi Institutes and Face Forward, a charity offering free procedures for victims of domestic abuse, warned that lads’ obsession with penis size could be a symptom of a serious psychological problem.

He said: “Most men who think they have a small penis actually don’t.

"Studies vary, but research suggests that the average erect penis ranges from under five inches to just under six inches.

“Most men who think their penis is too small have penis dysmorphic syndrome and would be better off seeing a shrink and not a surgeon.”

----

This site contains photos of brutality. Semantically and philosophically speaking, the photos are not brutal. What is brutal is the depicted reality.

----


95 percent of the victims of violence are men. Because women feel flattered when men fight each other and kill each other to prove that they are real men.

----

Preventing Chemical Weapons Use in Syria

Warnings by the United States and other countries threatening the Syrian regime with dire consequences if chemical weapons are used against rebel forces may have had the intended effect. Recent media reports suggest this concern has now diminished. It is just as plausible, however, that the regime had little intention of using its chemical weapons but fabricated the preparations that prompted the warnings to deter outside intervention in Syria’s civil war.

Either way, it is wrong to assume the danger of chemical weapons use in Syria is receding. Indeed, there are good reasons to believe it could grow in the coming weeks and months.

Syria, which is not a signatory of the Chemical Weapons Convention, is widely believed to possess sizeable stocks of different kinds of chemical weapons (CRS)--principally nerve (Sarin, VX) and blister (mustard gas) agents--that have been weaponized into bombs, artillery shells, and possibly warheads for delivery by missiles. How quickly this arsenal could be employed today is unclear from public reports, but it is prudent to believe that some, if not all of it, is operationally ready. Although the fighting to date has more than demonstrated the lethality of conventional weapons, the use of chemical agents would represent a significant escalation of the violence with potentially mass casualty consequences. It would also breach an international norm against the use of chemical weapons that is important to maintain.

Deliberate use of chemical weapons by government forces against either rebel groups or population centers considered sympathetic to their cause is certainly the scenario that has attracted the most concern. But it is just one of many conceivable scenarios to worry about.

For example, should rebel forces progressively gain the upper hand--as they seem to be doing--the regime or elements of the regime might retreat to predominantly Alawite areas of Syria to create a rump state. Chemical weapons could eventually be employed to deter further encroachment or defend these areas when they are assaulted. And if defeat looked inevitable, their use as a final act of defiance cannot be discounted.

Leaky Weapons

The United States and its international partners cannot assume, moreover, that they know of all the chemical weapons storage sites in Syria or that the movement of munitions from the known ones will be detected in a timely manner. Some may already have been secreted away by the regime as Muammar el-Qaddafi reportedly did after Libya had agreed to destroy its stockpile of chemical weapons.

Maintaining tight command and control over units and personnel with access to chemical weapons will become increasingly difficult as the regime collapses.

Maintaining tight command and control over units and personnel with access to chemical weapons will also become increasingly difficult as the regime collapses. For those in the field, any ambiguity about who is in charge and in the chain of command heightens the prospect of unauthorized use. Whether there is some pre-delegated authority to use these weapons under certain circumstances is also something be concerned about.

Another set of worrisome contingencies involve the capture and potential use of chemical weapons stocks by rebel forces. It is not hard to imagine how, in the heat of battle, chemical weapons could be turned against government forces or used in retribution for past atrocities. Some might even see their use as a way to trigger outside intervention. Other wildcard possibilities involve terrorist groups like Hezbollah acquiring chemical weapons in various ways as the Syrian regime crumbles.

Preventing these various threats from materializing clearly represents a much harder challenge than issuing warnings to the Syrian government. A broader, more nuanced strategy is required.

Though not conceived with potential chemical weapons use in mind, the elements of such a strategy can be found in the final report of the Genocide Prevention Task Force, co-chaired by former U.S. secretary of state Madeleine Albright and former U.S. secretary of defense William Cohen. Their report advocated targeting each of the principal groups in any given atrocity situation with a tailored set of preventive measures.

Preventive Steps

In the context of Syria, these target groups would be: those in a position to authorize the use of chemical weapons; those in physical control of them and able to execute orders; the potential victims of their use; and various third parties. The following measures should be considered by the principal international actors concerned by the potential use or loss of chemical weapons in Syria:

Warnings. In the event the Assad regime begins to unravel, U.S. officials as well as leading North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies and the United Nations secretary-general can reiterate public warnings of the consequences of using chemical weapons and, moreover, bolster these with more explicit threats. These can also be complemented with private messaging to leading figures in the regime that underscores the general warnings with more specific threats of punitive action, including likely criminal indictment.

Securing loose weapons. Known representatives of rebel groups operating in Syria can be given instructions about securing, if not disabling, chemical weapons stocks that fall into their possession while also being warned of the consequences should their fighters use them. At the same time, consideration should be given to offering inducements, including financial rewards, to rebel forces for supporting this effort. Governments known to be backing other groups with weapons and financial assistance can also be tapped to transmit the same message. These governments could likewise be warned of potential penalties if their proxies use chemical weapons.

Information warfare. To the extent that government units guarding or capable of using chemical weapons can be identified, these too can be the target of a discrete information warfare campaign. This could include television and radio broadcasts, email messaging (as was apparently used by U.S. forces in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003), and leafleting known storage sites in a collective effort to dissuade military personnel from using chemical weapons. Again, the messaging can be a mixture of positive and negative inducements to elicit cooperation.

Military strikes. Military options to deny or preempt the use of chemical weapons by any actor can be readied for rapid execution on receipt of compelling early warning. These range from the use of air strikes (including drones) and special operations forces to cyberattacks. Rebel groups in the vicinity of an expected attack might conceivably be employed to interdict use. Each of these options has different operational implications in terms of speed of use, potential effectiveness, and placing U.S. service personnel in harm’s way.

Surviving an attack. Unless there is accurate forewarning of intentions and preparations to use chemical weapons, the options to help vulnerable populations either avoid or survive an attack are limited. Some basic survival information could conceivably be transmitted to rebel groups to disseminate among local communities. Warnings might also be broadcast through various channels to specific areas deemed at risk but the potential unintended consequence of this could be to instigate mass panic that makes the situation worse.

Third party interventions. In addition to rebel supporters, there are several critical third parties that can be used to reinforce messaging on chemical weapons by the United States and others. This includes those with long-standing contacts with the Syrian regime (Russia and Iran), and Hezbollah (Iran).Other neighboring countries can be supported to improve their border security against the possible transfer of chemical weapons. And finally, various UN bodies and regional organizations in the Middle East can be encouraged to stress concerns already expressed by the UN secretary-general.

Collectively, these efforts would not preclude the use of chemical weapons in Syria, but they would lessen the risk. Moreover, they should not be a substitute for additional measures in the event these preventive efforts fail. These include additional diplomatic initiatives and potential military measures to disrupt or deter further chemical weapons use in Syria, as well as humanitarian assistance to help affected areas and respond to the possibility of large-scale refugee flows.

----

Judge: Rape facilitates a natural society where men are protectors

----

Australian 60 Minutes exposed the Worldwide Satanic Pedophile Network

Veterans Today

Note: This article is based on police investigatory reports… personal documented testimony of enraged policemen and women. The story itself has major credibility; and the facts presented here have been corroborated by hundreds of investigators, LE and private in the USA, UK and other nations. PJ]

Australian 60 Minutes published a story that 60 Minutes (America) would never dare touch. In America and the UK, the Pedophile Network controls high ranking Pedophile politicians, the Major Mass Media, FBI, the CIA and top Law Enforcement.

This has made it almost impossible to get the truth out to the populace about the presence and penetration of this worldwide Satanic Pedophile Network.

Those editors of the major mass media and elected or appointed officials that are not part of it or compromised by it realize that to try and expose it results in an immediate loss of their job, their retirement, and they will be blacklisted and perhaps even have their lives threatened.

Notwithstanding all these strong suppression forces in the past, not only was the CIA’s Franklin Credit Union pedophile scandal exposed by the Washington Times, but the finders scandal was exposed by US News and World Report.

And, despite those highly public exposures, the Major Mass Media failed to promote those important stories; and the stories died out, with no corrective actions by federal LE, which we now know is dirty to the core, because its own leaders are fully compromised by this Pedophile Network.

----

Imagery of brutal deaths are in itself anti-feminist. Because most women are natural cowards. And most feminism is just whimsical.

----

Kim Is Selling Her Virginity Online To Buy A Car

We know the feeling. You want a new car, but you don't have the money for one. So what do you do? Well, one girl from Austria is selling her virginity so she can buy a car, among other things.

Her name is Kim, and she's the latest young lady to list her virginity for sale to the highest bidder through a pimping service called Cinderalla Escorts, as reported by the Daily Mail and The Drive.

"After I read about other virgins who sold their virginity on Cinderella Escorts I asked myself one question,” Kim wrote in her statement on the company's website. “Should I give my virginity to a man who later on maybe will break up with me, or is it better to take a lot of money instead?”

She's not without her justification. Another girl named Alexandra entered into a similar arrangement with Cinderella Escorts, which secured a bid from a businessman from Hong Kong who paid €2.3 million for the right to take her virginity. Cinderella Escorts offers to manage the bidding process, collect payment on the prostitute's behalf, and arranges a doctor to confirm the girl's virginity is indeed in tact as advertised.

“That's why I decided to put an auction on Cinderella Escorts,” said Kim, who in addition to buying a car hopes to pay for an apartment and university tuition. So much for waiting tables, we suppose. Bidding starts at €100,000.

----


It is the secret dream of every Swedish or German woman to marry a black men, or at least have sex with a black man. Every smart young African man should migrate to Europe. Free money, nice house, good sex!

----

Anime Fans Angry Over BBC’s ‘Young Sex For Sale in Japan’ Documentary

The BBC's documentary about Japan's sexualisation of minors has turned heads in the anime and manga communities.

Crave

The BBC’s Young Sex For Sale in Japan documentary has raised the ire of many anime fans, with them criticising presenter Stacey Dooley for allegedly being ignorant of Japanese culture.

The documentary, which is available to view on BBC iPlayer for those in the UK, sees Dooley travelling to Tokyo in order to explore Japan’s attitudes to underage sex, and the sexualised portrayal of young girls in anime and manga. Along with investigating the incredibly creepy, real-world fascination with young girls in the country that involves adult men paying to spend time talking to them in specialised bars, Dooley also places a spotlight upon ‘lolicon’, a sub-genre of anime/manga dedicated to erotic art featuring prepubescent girls.

During the documentary Dooley talked to manga translator Dan Kanemitsu, who defended artists’ rights to create and sell art depicting prepubescent girls. During their conversation, Dooley picked up a book depicting a child-like character involved in a sexual act with an adult men. “Child pornography, at least by the broader definition of what is most offensive about it, is the fact that children are involved”, Kanemitsu argued. “So there’s a lot of debate about this, because on one hand there’s a child been harmed, and on the other hand there’s the depiction of a child being harmed [in anime/manga], and there’s a big difference between the two.”

“No actual child was harmed when they made this publication, I totally accept that, they are two separate things,” Dooley replied. “But do you worry that these images encourage and perhaps normalise child abuse?” Kanemitsu then argued that some people want to look at these images because it “plays out a fantasy separate from real life” and that it’s a “good venting mechanism.” He later added that “children need protecting” but that “lines of ink on paper do not”.

The idea that lolicon anime and manga is actually providing some kind of service to pedophiles is disturbing, even if those who support the sale of such works believe that it would infringe upon “free speech” to prohibit them from appearing on store shelves. When Dooley expressed to Kanemitsu that she feared that it “encouraged and normalised real-life child abuse,” he replied: “If you start saying creations of the mind can influence peoples’ behaviour, and those creations should be held responsible as opposed to the people who are actually doing them, that is thought policing.”

Many anime and manga fans agree with Kanemitsu’s argument and have strongly criticised the documentary, with Girls und Panzer artist Takeshi Nogami claimed that he had a three-hour interview with Dooley that was cut from the final edit. In a series of tweets translated by Twitter user @walterinsect, Nogami reportedly claimed that Dooley had said: “All human beings are naturally innocent and have no dirty desires, and reading media depicting erotic, pedophilic, and gore contents will affect them to be corrupted”, with her allegedly adding: “My desire is to put all pedophiles and ones who produce pedophilic media into jail”.

Though these comments definitely seem at odds with the way Dooley presents her argument during the documentary, many have taken Nohami’s words verbatim and have condemned Dooley for apparently enforcing the UK’s views onto Japanese culture. The topic was also angrily debated by YouTuber The Anime Man, with his video garnering over 100,000 views:

Many including The Anime Man have raised the point that Dooley’s comments aren’t dissimilar from the argument against violent video games. Over the years, many people from parents to politicians have argued that video games such as Grand Theft Auto could have a real-world impact, and that underage children and teens playing these games could mimic their violence in reality.

However, comparing Dooley’s argument against the one espoused by critics of violent video games undermines the core reasoning behind her disapproval of lolicon — that men lusting over prepubescent girls is already catered to in Japan, and further normalisation of it through media is not helping those fighting against it. During the documentary, Dooley interviews a photographer who takes “erotic” photographs of young girls, with him stating that the youngest girl he has had on his set was just 6 years old. She also visits a café in which men can book private chats with literal high school girls, where the men are freely allowed to discuss topics of a sexual nature with them. These are completely legal activities in Japan, despite it putting these young girls in mental and physical danger.

In practically every country throughout the world it is acknowledged that engaging in violence will lead to you being punished by law. However, such is Japan’s lax attitude to the sexualisation of minors that the country’s laws arguably encourage complicity with pedophiles, and the continued prevalence of lolicon anime/manga helps propagate the idea that, as long as someone isn’t engaging in sexual activity with a minor, it’s all fair game.

Sexualised photos of children under the age of consent is legal if their genitalia or buttocks aren’t exposed, and young girls can be paid by companies to stand on the streets and attract men into buying their products. This means that artwork depicting the sexual abuse of minors, while ostensibly “victimless” as a result of no child being directly harmed, is still contributing to beliefs that are harmful to children in wider society.

----

The world is full of multimillionaires who can't handle money. Because, if you have money, you either start building your own kingdom, or it's useless.

----

You Should Never Ever Do This (But If Your Going To Heres How): Killing Yourself

rochesterinsomniac.com

In 2010 there were 38,364 documented suicides in America. This is roughly 1/10th of unsuccessful attempts (or parasuicides) committed. Though many of these are “cries for help” and are intentionally foiled by the person committing the act, some are genuinely unsuccessful. 25% of parasuicide victims will go on to success within a year. By far the most common and successful method of committing suicide is by gun, with 53-55% of successful suicides in the US using them. Second in popularity and success to suicide by gun is suicide by suffocation/hanging with roughly 22-25% using this method. Third to suffocation is poisoning, which includes intentional drug overdoses and consumption of toxic substances. About 18% use this method.

There are many other methods used, some uncommon due to circumstances such as the high amount of pain and discomfort experienced, or the fear associated with these methods. Some of these methods are downright unsuccessful, or are accidents occurring whilst crying for help.

These methods are as follow: Falling/jumping, cutting/piercing, drowning, self immolation, and transportation related suicides such as driving into walls, throwing yourself into a train, bus, car, etc. All methods, of course can be used in combination. ex: Slash your wrists, eat 80 Benadryl, douse yourself in gasoline, light a cigarette, and throw yourself off of an overpass in front of a Greyhound, semi, truck, Prius, etc. This will make a particularly newsworthy story, getting you the attention you sought in life for all of four days.

Suicide by Gun:

Chances of success increase when a shotgun is used in comparison to a rifle or handgun. This is due to the energy delivered on impact, as well as the scatter of projectiles, rather that one. However, a shotgun is harder to aim at more fatal points, such as the side and back of the head. Aiming at the head is of course a more fatal delivery point, as opposed to the chest or abdomen. By far the least successful method and delivery point being a handgun to the chest and/or abdomen. For a best possible result, use shotgun equipped with a solid lead slug, or double-aught (or larger) buckshot. Chances of success fall when using an unmaintained firearm, or old ammunition, as aged ammunition may not reach proper velocity or even discharge. The same effect applies to an unmaintained firearm. FMJ (full metal jacket rounds) also have a lesser chance of success as the round when expelled does not expand, creating a cleaner wound, and inflicting less damage on impact. A firearm is not suitable for a suicidal gesture, as the chances of success are much higher than other methods. Possible effects of failing: Disfigurement, paralysis, pain, infection, brain damage, damage to liver, spleen, diaphragm, and collapsed lungs.

The scene left behind, of course will not be pleasant for the person who finds you. Blood, bone and/or brain fragments spread over the area, facial disfigurement, and significant blood loss.

Suicide by Hanging:

There are two basic methods of hanging: simple suspension and drop. In simple suspension, death is most likely caused by asphyxiation due to the weight of the body being suspended in the noose. Death is also possible by arterial and/or vein compression, cutting off blood supply to the brain, or heart and lungs. In drop hanging, a platform is kicked out from under the person, and the person drops, instantly breaking the neck and rupturing the spinal cord, causing an almost instant death.

A key part of hanging is the knot. Tie a simple noose with some sturdy rope, such as hemp or manila. Test the noose, as it should tighten with applied pressure. The knot should sit behind your neck. The other end of the rope should be attached to something sturdy that will not move, or break, such as a hook, rafter, or railing. The knot should be tied securely to ensure that it doesn’t slip off of the surface. Strangulation can be achieved by sitting down, bending the knees, laying down, or kicking a platform (such as a chair) out from under you. Of course, it should be mentioned again that the rope should be sturdy, as the body will thrash in its death throes.

If the hanging is interrupted by discovery, rope breakage, or slippage, brain damage can occur. As with before, the scene left behind will not be pleasant for those who discover you. Often, the tongue will swell and protrude from the mouth; the face will often turn blue due to oxygen and blood deprivation. In all cases there will be defecation and urination.

Suicide by Drug Overdose:

When used as a sole means of suicide, drug overdose is seldom successful. The potency of street drugs commonly used (such as heroin) is commonly unreliable. MLD (minimum lethal dosage) is often hard to calculate and is somewhat unreliable due to outside factors such as weight, tolerance, and whether not a meal has been eaten recently. Contrary to popular belief, this is not a quick and painless method. It takes anywhere from 3 to 10 hours on average, depending on the drug taken. Several drugs cause convulsions before death. Even more drugs cause vomiting, fever, heart palpitations and pain. Drug overdose a risky and unreliable method.

Exit bag:

An exit bag is a suicide apparatus that brings about a relatively quick and painless death. Manufactured out of a large plastic bag with a draw cord or a Velcro strap for neck fastening and an inert gas such as helium or nitrogen; it brings a quick end to things, without unwanted pain or panic. Unconsciousness sets in within minutes and death sets in within twenty minutes. The result is a quick and painless death with a body that seems serine and at peace. Of course if the act is interrupted it can result in brain damage, which is why it should be carried out in an undisturbed setting. A suicide bag is sometimes used along side with a drug overdose, in order to ensure the desired result.

Suicide by Jumping:

Death by jumping is effective if done from a sufficient height, and while it is not common in the United States, it makes up a large amount of suicides in many cities and countries around the world, such as Hong Kong. A jump should be performed at a height of 150 feet or higher above land, or 250 feet or higher above water. Of course, care should be taken to land on your head, as it would result in a quicker death. It is key to avoid a foot first water landing, as this could result in nonfatal injuries. Jumping is a difficult way to commit suicide as the natural self preservation instinct is to not fall from a great height. This is hard to overcome. This method, of course results in a fairly gruesome corpse.

Suicide by Train:

Suicide by train is a rather uncommon and extremely gruesome method to end your life with. Death can be rather quick, but it can also be drawn out and extremely painful. If you aren’t decapitated, there is a chance that you could bounce off of the train, and find one of your limbs on the tracks. Injuries can range from broken bones to amputations, and severe brain damage. Suicide by train can be traumatic to many people such as train drivers, cleanup crews, and the family member/ loved one that will have to identify your body later on at the scene or in the morgue.

Wrist cutting:

Wrist cutting is mostly practiced as a method of self harm rather than suicide, though it occasionally leads to death due to unchecked bleeding that can lead to shock, and loss of consciousness. Often survivors find that they have limited use of their hands due to severed tendons and loss of nerve use and the ability to touch. Though it may seem like the only option or a quick way out of your problems, suicide is effectively stealing everything from your, as well as your loved one’s future. Often the reasoning behind it is faulty, selfish, and subjective. One should always look at every available option and make an educated decision when it comes to serious situations and decisions such as suicide. When you say you’re alone in something remember that there are over seven billion others, most living and functioning in worse condition than you.

----

To understand life, you first have to understand death. This is why we include images of death. The best we can hope for, is that death will be comfortable.

----

Home | Index of articles