^ Just to be clear people with Schizophrenia and other psychotic conditions do have an elevated risk of committing violent acts. It's about 20% of pre diagnosed patients and around 9% of post treatment/diagnosis patients. As opposed to around 1-2% of the "normal" population.

The only big exception to this is in hospital itself where it can rise as high as 50%, however this is pretty well understood to be a product of the environment and circumstances (i.e. you are forcibly being held against your will). It's also one of the reasons you managed to evoke such hostility from me, the idea that people should just be committed/sectioned because they appear somewhat unstable is one that causes a great deal more harm that good.
There are people that are a genuine danger to themselves and or others when in the grips of an "episode", such people are why mental health sections exist, however extreme care and attention must be applied when considering someone who has yet to commit an "index offence".

If she's attacked people (or herself) before when displaying the same symptoms fine, if she has a history of refusing reasonable treatment fine, if she goes and attacks someone fine. But you can't just go around locking people up because they behave strangely. For all we know this lady has never hurt anyone and is not likely to do so, you can't make the kind of judgements your making without fully understanding the patient and the nature of their condition.
There are people I work with you'd instantly label as crazy and possibly dangerous. One guy has a trait of sometimes staring hard at you (esp strangers) while talking intensely under his breath to himself. If you saw him doing that to you and you'd never met him you'd probably shit yourself a bit (I know I did) but the dude is about as gentle as they come! He'd only ever act violently if you cornered him while he was confused and even then probably not. (never been a problem in the 2 years I worked with him)

I'm not saying this lady definitely isn't in any way dangerous, or even that it might not be better to taker her in under a section. I'm simply saying that making assumptions like that is extremely damaging both to the sufferers and to our ability to understand and help them.

Now the whole Gay/Lesbian/Transgender thing has started to become a normal part of our culture mental health is the perhaps one of the last great bullshit taboos left.

Their not crazies, THEIR FUCKING PEOPLE!!!

And I know this because I've yet to meet a truly "sane" human in my life.

THIS is why you can't do rape jokes. Society is NOT mature or sensitive enough to know what to do with the subject matter. The anonymity of the internet is no excuse. This is what lurks underneath, internet or no internet. It does not lurk under all, or even most, but some and some is enough. Joking about it reduces its absolute prohibitive status and trivialises the severity of the impact it has on victims and families of all involved.

It is this absolute prohibition that is at stake here. Murder can be joked about because there is an underlying suspicion that we could all do it given the right provocations. Rape however does not have the same situationalist concept. It is not something we secretly want to do when we are frustrated. It is not something we wish on our loved ones to shut them up. It is not something to that is idly fantasized about in the same way that battery and murder are. Therefore, the "comedy" around it has no common ground except for the horror of the experience itself which relies on a victims experience being imagined in the minds of others. We may laugh out of shock but that is all there is, shock. Taboo makes us uncomfortable and we laugh when confronted with it if the circumstances are right and a comedy club instantiates such circumstances. The only comedy, as in laughter from shared premises taken to an unexpected extreme, to come from rape 'comedy' are jokes about 'rape comedy' itself.

Feminism is oppressive to rational people in the same way that any stupid and pervasive idea that influences the explicit and implicit rules of society is oppressive.

Again, feminism is not the doctrine that women should be treated fairly; that's what everyone who's actually awake already believes. What feminism is, is a gloopy mess of paranoia, arbitrary rules, rape fantasies, political correctness, still-born philosophies, pointless taboos, obstructionism and pure seething insanity.

It causes real harm, including yes it could be argued, killing people. Look at all the resources, private and public, time and material, that are squandered on it instead of being spent on, say, science.

How do you KNOW?

Physics is something that is only beginning to be understood. The Laws of Physics are subjective to change. We will probably find out soon whether the speed of light is a constant it may be that the speed of light is not a constant.

My point is, is that we have barely even tipped our toes into the way everything works, while I trust science much more than any religion I am not arrogant enough to think that there are fundamental aspects of reality that we simply do not understand on any level.

Another point is, if you ever take DMT. Most people have no words to describe what they see. As stupid monkey humans we have defined vague terms to mean something. Even if someone thinks a DMT experience is spiritual, so what? Because it is chemicals in the brain? What basis do you have to say that having a spiritual experience is not considering it is based upon the science of the Universe? Spiritual, God, dark matter, death, even consciousness are terms that ill defined with monkey brains.

I think you believe that "spiritual" must mean dogmatic religion. Science in itself can be "spiritual", contemplating the Universe can be "spiritual". I repeat that term because at this point in our culture-less society that term is taboo. I know some people consider FUCKING to be "spiritual". I am not implying that I believe in any religion, I do not, at all. DMT is like experiencing the Universe in your own head. It is the one and only experience that is convincing enough to say that we know very little, it is the most humbling and powerful experience there is. And if there is one using endogenous chemicals, more powerful, I do not want to even know about it, myself.

I cannot figure out what you are trying to debate? That there is no science behind DMT? That there is nothing to DMT? That "spiritual" does not exist? What is your point of this continued conversation? That you are scared of psychedelics? Why do you think such an experience would have been programmed into our head, the most powerful experience a person can have? How do you think DNA evolved over so many years, you ever read Francis Cricks, who helped found DNA, what his theory for DNA was? Panspermia. Yeah. The Universe is a lot trickier than just our basic Science.

One thing is clear, you are never going to know what I am talking about until you have that experience. Why not? It has never killed anyone... you will think you have died because what you are witnessing is alien and defies explanation. It will be so awesome, that you will not even care that you died or think you have died. People should do it, even if it is just to be in awe of what your own vessel is capable of doing.

"Get government out of healthcare" ... yea fuck tricare

briefly: it takes a handful of full time employees JUST to call and get insurance approval and do billing for a busy medical office like an eye surgeon.. that money could be better spent, thats basically cutting overhead that should occur, and now on to mention the taboo, profits made by insurance companies.. ya know, the guy in between you and your doctor?

yea F the govt that is extending health care benefits for people under their parents plans, i want Mr. X to die before i have to pay out my profit!

u see why u scum... yea...

I do sort of find the honesty of it attractive. This creature had to die for you to eat. I'm not really sure if its that much more barbaric than what happens to the meat you buy at the supermarket. I mean, we've all probably eaten some poor chicken that spent its entire existence inside a tiny cage.

Meanwhile in parts of the UK and Europe we are running DNA tests on beef to check it for horse meat. This is the extent we have become distanced from the slaughter of the animals we eat. Frankly, after watching a pig being turned from living thing to bacon it made me wonder if it was a taboo meat in so many cultures simply because it was so upsetting to slaughter them. I try and remember that pig hanging on a hook bleeding out whenever I eat meat.

Stupid parents.

Yes, let's sanitize the world and shield our kids from reality. By making stupid things like that taboo, you give the words power, and you've instantly made your kids more interested in it and when they learn about it on their own without you, it undermines the respect your kids may or may not have for you.

Your video, Breaking The Taboo - Film, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

wait no longer.

Breaking the Taboo Trailer has been added as a related post - related requested by Trancecoach on that post.

Breaking The Taboo - Film has been added as a related post - related requested by Trancecoach.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Breaking-The-Taboo-Film

yeah, video title is just a tad misleading.

We really should be using nuclear. Someone smarter than I on the subject should comment, but I believe those breeder style reactors did reprocess the fuel and on top of it, were impossible to meltdown.

the problem is:

1. We're too scared to even touch nuclear. It's become taboo. and the NIMBY mentality has set in.
2. Crazy insanely expensive.

I'd say the only hypocrisy here is why is it ok to go after nuclear, but mention solar and suddenly the republicans start crying socialism. Or is it just that republicans are so desperate to pin anything on Obama that they don't give a crap if they're hypocrites. You heard Romney folks, we should be looking into everything.

We have a "post-privacy" movement in Germany (I'm sure this exists in other countries, too).
They stand for full identification in any interaction on the web.
here is a statement from the CCC which sums up their case pretty accurately.

I don't like it.
>> ^dag:

Is there a movement to accountabilise the web? I sure haven't seen much evidence of it. Most places I visit - it's pretty much anything goes.
I don't think it's just honesty and dumbfuckery. It's more about what the article describes, the feeling that "it's just a game" and a fantasy outlet for expressing sublimated rage, sadness etc in a "safe" way (without a chance of retribution).
I agree with @ReverendTed that scaling moderation by members is the way to handle lots and lots of comments.
>> ^gorillaman:
There wouldn't be any reason to visit videosift without the comments.
The reason you see so much dumbfuckery online is people are able to be more open about who they are, and most people, at their core, are dumb fucks. So deal with it; it's better than living your life in a straightjacket of manners and convention.
I despise this movement to 'accountabilitise' the web. It comes from those who enjoy their social power too much and want to tighten their grip over the few remaining sanctuaries of free expression. I'm not talking about big evil governments; I'm talking about the control of people who are able to punish your dissent in ways like not inviting you to a wedding or blocking a promotion. If we're able to have open, honest interactions without fear then their power dissipates.
RL conversations should be more like web conversations; honesty is valuable and bullshit taboos and rituals are not.
If this puts me in the vocal minority, then I am glad.

@messenger sorry but I'm walking away from you now because you mentioned Hitler killing jews, I'm not stepping into that minefield, you know how emotional sifters get trigger happy downvoting taboo subjects.