PCP Hallucinations in Ferguson - Reason.com: "Koon still thought his mistaken belief about the content of King's blood should count as a mitigating factor, since everyone knows that PCP turns people into irrationally violent monsters with superhuman strength. Wikipedia As is often the case with illegal drugs, what everyone knows turns out to be wrong. In a1988 review of 350 journal articles on PCP in humans, the psychiatrist Martin Brecher and his colleagues concluded that "PCP does not live up to its reputation as a violence-inducing drug." Brecher et al. noted that high doses of PCP can produce "severe agitation and hyperactivity," along with "cognitive disorganization, disorientation, hallucinations, and paranoia." Combined with the drug's anesthetic effect, which makes users less sensitive to pain and therefore harder to restrain, such acute reactions have contributed to PCP's fearsome image. Yet in their search of the literature, Brecher and his co-authors found only three documented cases in which people under the influence of PCP alone had committed acts of violence. They also noted that between 1959 and 1965, when PCP was tested as a human anesthetic, it was given to hundreds of patients, but "not a single case of violence was reported..
This does not mean PCP users are never violent. But when they are, their behavior cannot be understood as a straightforward effect of the drug. "Research on the nexus between substance use and aggression," notes the criminologist Jeffrey Fagan, "consistently has found a complex relation, mediated by the type of substance and its psychoactive effects, personality factors and the expected effects of substances, situational factors in the immediate settings where substances are used, and sociocultural factors that channel the arousal effects of substances into behaviors that may include aggression." The pharmacologist John P. Morgan and the sociologist Lynn Zimmer put it this way: "No drug directly causes violence simply through its pharmacological action."
This point is obvious when we consider alcohol, the drug that is most strongly associated with violence. The fact that some people get into fights after drinking does not mean alcohol makes them behave that way. Variations in responses to alcohol across individuals, cultures, and situations show that drinking does not necessarily lead to bloodshed. "
Romantic comedies have a lot to answer for.
Glad I am not single these days. Why Are Educated Women More Likely To Be Single?: "In a recent piece at EliteDaily.com, Lauren “LMoney” Martin offers her own take on the subject and, in the process, brings us much closer to the clarification that prior discourse has sought.
But why is this? Why don’t men want women with whom they can converse and who challenge them? When did the aversion to strong and intelligent women become a code orange? When did everyone just want to go to the Bahamas and lie around?
This quote from LMoney puts a spotlight on one of the primary sources of the romantic malaise plaguing so many highly educated women: arrogance...
The reality, of course, is quite contrary to this. Not every woman who went to a great school and graduated with a high GPA is particularly skilled in conversation with the opposite sex. Just as a significant number of extremely intelligent men find their interpersonal communication skills wanting (especially when applied to the opposite sex), so do intelligent women sometimes struggle to connect with men they find interesting. Many of the women most skilled at conversing with the opposite sex do not have the greatest academic credentials...
In an article by “The Wire,” financial reporter, John Carney, gives one explanation for this phenomenon, deducing, “successful men date less successful women not because they want ‘women to be dumb’ but rather because they want ‘someone who prioritizes their life in a way that’s compatible with how you prioritize yours.’” Basically, they want someone... who is dumb enough to make them a priority and, unfortunately, for all those sane, rational and intelligent women out there, there’s a hefty number of these women out there...
The implications above are as follows: 1. Women who make their men (and families) a priority are dumb. 2. Women like LMoney who prioritize their careers and do not make men and families a priority are the only women who are “sane, rational and intelligent.”
In short, LMoney is making the following argument: “Those who do not hold the same perspective on the intersection of romantic and professional life that I hold are insane, unreasonable, and unintelligent.”
...the fundamental problem with too many women like LMoney: they think they bring far more to the table than they actually do, and are so confident in this belief that they base a tremendous portion of their self-worth and identity on it. Since this belief implies that they are already in possession of everything a member of the opposite sex could want, they don’t spend much time actually examining what the opposite sex wants and correcting any potential deficiencies they may have. As they age and begin to perceive a disconnect between their belief in their own superiority and the reality they live in, they end up in a difficult position. Because they’ve been so convinced of their superiority for so long, they’re entirely unprepared to deal with a reality in which they are not ideal and may actually have to make some personal improvements in order to get what they want or (GASP) settle for something else.
They also spend so much energy embodying the ideal of the independent woman (loudly, proudly, and consistently proclaiming that they do not prioritize men and don’t really need them for anything) that they compromise their ability to find the romantic gratification they subconsciously crave. Good relationships involve a degree of mutual dependence, with each partner recognizing the value of the other and treating them accordingly. In a good relationship, it is typical for both partners to develop an actual need for one another — their presence becomes crucial to the wellbeing of the other. They become a priority to one another because of how much they matter to one another...
One can imagine it being substantially more difficult to begin and maintain such a relationship when you have spent so much energy investing in the idea that individuals of the opposite sex are totally unnecessary and fundamentally unworthy of the serious effort needed to bring and keep them in your life. How difficult must it be to maintain a serious relationship when you’ve spent the bulk of your life marking the individual you seek to enter a relationship with as a disposable and unessential accessory (at best) and an unnecessary nuisance (at worst)?"
JCVD FTW.
Seems Legit.
Movies used to be awesome.
Sometimes I miss America so much it hurts. The $10 “Meat Mountain” from Arby’s: It’s exactly what it sounds like. - The Washington Post: "The “Meat Mountain,” as it’s called, will not be listed on the menu, but store associates will make it for customers who ask. The price is $10. For that, you get a bun and, from the bottom up: 2 chicken tenders 1.5 oz. of roast turkey 1.5 oz. of ham 1 slice of Swiss cheese 1.5 oz. of corned beef 1.5 oz. brisket 1.5 oz. of Angus steak 1 slice of cheddar cheese 1.5 oz. roast beef 3 half-strips of bacon"
"We do things that are urgent, but not important." Breaking the Pattern of Reaction to Regain Control
No comments:
Post a Comment