Chikatilo comments

@nogardflow

The male analogy would be not with male nipples, but with male genitalia perhaps through a very tight spandex shorts or something, would she be ok with a male riding a plane next to her like that? wouldn't she complain to the airline? It is what it is. Think it through, ride with it. Don't make a fuss

@ Moonraker

Now some are still around, railing against signs that Japan is importing "wokeness", losing its chauvinistic traditions and less a heaven for their prejudices.

I do think Japan shouldn't care about wokeness, Japan should improve it's society the way it fits its society, i.e., whomever has an inconformity should just state what they would like to happen to them and work out the best ways to have that corrected within the Japanese society, and not just repeat slogans or ideas from abroad just because the west has it like such.

It's like your use of the term "chauvinism". While seemingly widely accepted in western vocabulary, it is not at all appropriate to apply it to a different society. It is as if Japanese would call American progressiveness for "robbing men of their chi" or some other shinto concepts. Cannot judge a society through another's bar.

That is why the world has different societies. Outside serves as reference, but when reflected inwards it must be dealt from within the spirit of each society. The concepts of masculinity and femininity are different in Japan than in the west, and are rooted in different concepts that those of the west of course, and have very different levels and degrees of acceptance and permeation in each culture, and therefore cannot and should not try to bring them to the same end-result through the same means as they are NOT the same.

We shouldn't be wanting to do away with lovely Japanese women femininity, specially if Japanese women don't want to at large!

Don't if this lady had done this before and being able to fly, in that case, she might have had an argument, some comment that a visual is needed to know whether her choice was tasteless or not, and surely an image would help. However, if the airline people saw and understood she was wearing no bra, and she confirm it, come on, she should know better. Again, not clear on how often she gets out with it, but I cannot fathom it being OK'd anywhere I've ever traveled. Surely breast are not a weapon, and surely they are lovely, the reasons for keeping female breast from not being to revealed are long known and accepted way back. I find it annoying she plays the victim. It is what it is. The male analogy would be not with male nipples, but with male genitalia perhaps through a very tight spandex shorts or something, would she be ok with a male riding a plane next to her like that? wouldn't she complain to the airline? It is what it is. Think it through, ride with it. Don't make a fuss.

Agree with some commenters that life in Japan is not better because they adopt foreign standards of life.

Economic issues in the end, cause stresses and tears in family and societal fabric that bring it to its knees. Japan's society nucleus used to be the family, but first with the exaggerated importance to work, fathers tended to neglect their families entirely, leaving wives neglected as well, to burn out, father eventually burning out from work as well, and leaving kids with just school and friends as their focus in life, it has slowly changed, but as it changed, economy has deflated, salaries flat and price of life increases, focus on bunch of outlier issues like climate, sexual preferences or such, instead of revitalizing the nucleus of the society in the family to make it stronger and make more young people desire to form a family, instead, as the article points out the show let's see, matrimony is not equaled to happiness anymore (it was allowed to degrade like that), and people do not date, do not marry, do not have sex, do not have kids. How anyone would see this as conducing to a better future it's mind boggling. Strengthen family, better support parents, better job schedules, better salaries, better school times and care facilities, more incentives, otherwise it is the end, eventually.

This is a serious issue that is long been not dealt with by government and society at large. Support for working parents (like care centers, and/or jobs with flex time or better times), and the resulting overall dull life of a salaryman/parent life make it so unappealing to the new generations they just don't care anymore. Also, the long standing "fate" of Japanese couples that go sexless once a child is born, coupled with a general disinterest in traditional sex (there's so much online stuff, toys, etc) from young generation and a slowly creeping de-musculation of men even in Japan (lately TV role-models are highly feminized) and it all but spells more doom for the future of birth rate. Yet, high schools are more worried in having inclusive uniforms, or people make such a fuss for same-sez marriage legality not being addressed, when a much bigger, deeper and with much more greater consequences problem of falling birthrate exists. Talk about nitwit, nincompoop, backwards society of our times.

Nothing happier than to be a kid in a household where the parents fight incessantly and are constantly at war with each other. Great way to grow up, but divorce? Ooooh, taboo.

The fact that family has a purpose and an objective doesn't mean all families will achieve it.

It takes 2 fully committed competent adults to do so.

Yes, several families will struggle, even those with some semblance of thinking, considerate adults. But everything in life is a struggle.

That a family can become dysfunctional is very true and a high risk as well. But it means the adults in it, the married couple have not he tools. maturity, commitment etc. to make it work.

Even families that struggle to a degree, if there is commitment, some kind of communication, and some resourcefulness can end of improving. Nothing is ever perfect. Not should it be expected to be.

I don't think anybody is saying all divorce should never be allowed. When the physical and/or emotional security and safety of the members is compromised, it may be the only viable solution.

But that doesn't in any way preclude or detriment the fact that the family has a very special purpose and specific objective. The onus is on each married couple to be aware of it and prepare themselves for the toil.

It helps if actual adult love is involved, and some wit and wisdom as well.

Give away the food to dog owners or, to homeless people sleeping in the streets.

> give it to people who don't have enough?

People saying this, please think it through.

If perfectly edible food were just to be given away come certain time... wouldn't the number of people just expecting that increase? because why make the effort to earn some yens if you can get it for free later on. And isn't it proven to be better to teach people to fish, rather than just giving free fish? Do people living in the street should stay that way and be supported to stay that way? or rather encouraged and supported to having a better living condition?

Surely there is a time for compassion and free-giving, but that and a system of just giving, is a very different monster. It cannot be so that people become dependent and reliant on it for survival. There has to be some accountability of sorts, some verifiable effort to move on or move back and a commitment to do so. Which a convenience store is not prepared to follow up and control.

Could forward the leftovers to organizations that help children. Children by definition and moving on, meaning growing up and have every expectation to end up sustaining themselves. So it's an easier scenario. I thonk.

＠Paustovsky

Really? what is there to gain from defending this way of life and way of thinking that "everything goes"? Because in the end it's what is comes to. Like I mentioned look to the US. It started as tolerance of a private issue, and now it's everywhere, even when the occurrence has never been demonstrated to be healthy normal (as in being the result of a healthy situation) and when as Jenni pointed out is existence is not defendable as beneficial for mankind's existence. And other reasons.

Bigotry is a thrown out term to silence criticism and legitimate claims and questions.

There's no need for their lifestyle to be normalized. There is no gain. And they suffer no real intolerance legally as marriage has a purpose of rising children.

They don't need to be legally married. As they don't have a purpose.

Just "being in love" is no purpose.

＠virusrex...

your quick degradation to personal attacks 

Touché. I did realize that. Mea culpa.

I wanted to point out instead of educational or trying to enlighten, how you come across as pedantic and with a superiority complex.

The link you provided is highly interesting.

I see your point about what a consensus actually is the context you are talking about. As the article you provided shows consensus in this case is not "100%" as a default. My understanding as I wrote my comment was that consensus meant "100%" accordance. Which is not. So I stand corrected if indeed in your comments you mean consensus as just "a large majority" as in so far I could read there is no consensus as to what percentage upwards can actually be deemed consensus (60%? 70%? 80? 90?) . Which actually serves to be boarder point that given consensus is not 100%, means there is still the scientific reality of it not being entirely truth or other possibilities may also exist.

Also, although the link you provided is a very well put up study, just because a study is done it doesn't mean it's a scientific one. Scientific studies are those made using the scientific method of proving hypothesis through a replication of the conditions in a controlled environment.

Studies that don't do that are either empirical studies, or just statistical, mathematical, etc. papers (studies).

True, most are generally spoken under the umbrella of "science", true that several scientist who actually perform scientific studies ALSO perform empirical, mathematical, etc studies. All of this though does not in reality make them scientific. For strict scientific definition purposes.

That is a huge thing. The study you linked cannot claim to have scientifically proven that doctors are in consensus. It has statistically empirically (by observation of surveyed anecdotal references) demonstrated it in the universe polled (I think doctors in Chekoslovaquia was their main sample?)

So, I do remain suspicious of politicians. I grant you, I do not wanna bother to research myself, no excuse there.

@quercetum

They want to give the message that despite the leadership change, we are still a traditional sexist Japanese company.

For crying out loud, you must feel so proud of yourself for noting the beautiful sexy girls and not feeling attracted or aroused by them, but actually wanting to see some lady in a suit leading the way.

Sarcasm aside, what actually do you really want? and more importantly why?? Is it just the attention? the satisfaction to have pointed out something so trivial to a world's top organization? or what? wanna see women presenting a car company in Japan? why and why? to what end? not saying it is bad? but really honestly why?? just because some quota, or because seeing dudes as presidents is boring, or out of trend?? or what? what would it actually benefit the world? beyond some idiosyncratic platitude about equality.

Women are perfectly capable of reaching this position and doing it, but could you first at least ask around to actual ladies in the auto industry if they would be willing to put the work and the effort and actually achieve and perform the job of president of Toyota? Or do you just want it handed to to them? The fact of the matter is if a woman wanted it she could get it. Is that simple.

But it is indeed a man's field. Production engineers, quality engineers, designers, not to mention laborers etc. are all mostly men in this industry I am also part of. And in Japan, at least from my experience few women are willing to toil toe to toe to executive men, and more importantly, seemingly none want it not desire it.

So your comment is totally moot.

You with your US world view do not represent the panacea, nor the only truth and right, if you don't like it here go back to your beloved US.

＠virusrex...

"There is a reason why the scientific consensus is not on the side of the antivaxxers."

"Scientific consensus"?? Where in the world is there such a thing? Where do you get your scientific consensus? There's "scientific" powerhouses that dominate the sphere and whose "conclusions" are taken as to be truth.

There is no such thing as "one" science, science is a method. And it's a method that in and itself begs and accepts all types of questions, doubts and x factors.

A scientific study is such because it can only replicate reality to a certain degree, depending on which its result would be either extrapolatable to a boarder universe or deemed statistically significant or not, much of which depends on variable control to be able to determine if what you suppose cause certain effect indeed cause it or not.

Not once in the news or out of any draconian politician quoiting "science" were the mentions of the statistical significance of such studies or whether the science was good enough to extrapolate to the entire population.

How can you trust that as the rabid scientific zealot you seem to be, is a testament of your blindness.

"Since those "experts" are actually antivaxxers pretending the experts said things they never did this is correct, the misinformation came completely from antivaxxers."

You did see the WHO chief say "vaccines didn't work as expected" (sorry paraphrasing here), didn't you? And not to mention Fauci...

What makes an expert worthy of your trust anyway?

If others in the scientific community respect them at a time, just because they veer of the mass mentality is not a fair cause to mistrust them, ON THE CONTRARY I would say!

Like I said above, science is by definition open to question and discourse and division and repeated endless corroboration and correction of previous understandings, thus having a "consensus" is a oxymoron in science, when a "consensus" is reached is the END of science. Questioning and doubting should persist for science to be science.

When you say "shut up, is science" you automatically become the LEAST scientifically versed person and anti-science. You become dogmatic and religious.

In most governments and committees there is an understanding written or not, I do not know, that even if all are in unison accord, one should be in discord just so as to not eliminate the idea that all other could be wrong and a very minimum outline defined for the very least action to take in the event the majority was wrong.

Do you have this capacity in you?

But of course it should, and they should and ought to.

Just by the fact that is cryptocurrency is now apparently largely used on the darkweb for pay in participation in atrocities. Who know what other things are being paid by it, I know of scammers and hackers who demand payment in cryptocurrency as well. It's scary and suspicious at the same time how it has been allowed to become so.

Again I ask, how did the Florida teenage shooter, Nikolas Cruz got weapons totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars in cost?? If he or his family had had access to that real kind of money, would he had really had the need to do what he did??

These are the questions that always remain unanswered. It's just "gunman massshoots some people somewhere"! okay, but it's not like weapons are cheap and or readily available to anyone, perhaps gun laws are lax or whatnot, but were is the analysis of WHAT went actually wrong in EACH case??? There is ZERO analysis of cause and what enabled the mentally unstable person to access guns. That is in itself troubling and dubious.

All the people commenting on gun control and saying goodbye to guns in America... Think your ideas through and through, weigh them against realistic implementation in a country with hundreds of thousands , if not millions, of guns, and then try some deeper soul search before spewing diatribes.

Calling for gun control and ban on guns out of the bat it's as stupid as a parent confiscating toys when his kids throw them at each other in a fight. Surely, having something to throw at each other made possible the "throwing", but toys in themselves are not the problem (granted guns are not just toys), but isn't it the issue WHY did they not only threw them at themselves, but MOST importantly WHY they thought it was OKAY to do so, and how to make them understand and behave in a way that THAT is not even a thought.

For all the mass shootings, 600 or so, there is NEVER a follow up on the deep causes, why they did it, how they planned it, why they thought it was something they would do, where did the guns came from!!! (remember the kid who opened fire at his high school, a high school kid living with his not so well to do grandparents with weapons totaling up to hundreds of thousand of dollars, form where?? how?? ), and/or statistics about how many are performed by whites, blacks, hispanics, single, mentally ill, etc.. are all out kept out, and real analysis done.

Current cancel, intolerant culture, and most individualistic, solitary, also plays a role, immigrants from 3rd world countries don't have the same values, morals and regard for life and society as real Americans, also bad guys have weapons everywhere, even in a strict gun law country as Japan, why do you think is called "gun trafficking"?

SO it's no easy thing.

First get wokeism out of your minds and schools. Teach people to be real Americans. Bring back teaching morals, bring back morality and spirituality, Teach people to be strong wiled, not to be snowflakes, curtail immigration to only allow the right people, based on merit and benefit for your country. Stop buying drugs!!! and using them!! You promote only MORE gun violence not only in the US, but all throughout Mexico and some of Latin America for production and distribution.

The question is can you and are you willing to do this??

and Why do all Biden policies point to increase in conditions that promote gun violence: zero immigration control, lax prosecution, less policing, less moral education or zero, more emphasis on emotional woke than self control and resilience??

Just trying to rip the toys away will not end violence. In Japan we know well, people will use knives, cars, fires.

Surely it doesn't reach "mass shooting" level of death every time, but my point is violence can happen with or without guns. Because the causes are STILL there.

Is that how we make decisions now, it seems, just ask kids what they would prefer. That is why they are teenagers, cannot choose by themselves everything.

Where have all the experienced developmental psychologists gone?? Where are they? Where is their voice and experience? Funny how easy psychological science is ignored and disregarded.

An identity crisis exists for every teenager in the world, actually to every human in the world at different stages in life. It is specially critical and important to solve the early ones at early stages of development.

Helping teenagers with an identity crisis by letting wear whatever they please, is like giving them a candy to solve innermost psychological issues. It's just a lazy attempt to help, an at that a completely abhorrent one since totally ignores to the question why? which is what most teenagers are wanting to let out, with their acting out. They want and need help to untangle their minds from pain. frustration, duress, lack of confidence, lack of care, love and meaningful relationships, and many times lack of proper physical care (nutritionally, hygienically, medically, et)c., don't school authorities know why well nourished, with at least some good relationships, and mostly from 2 parent households were at least one parent is caring and nurturing, are almost never amongst those with a terrible identity crisis, least of all a gender one.

It was, and it has been a well known fact.

But instead of legitimately help them fight their demons, find their true confidence from within, we placate their urge with rattles, blankets and pacifiers in the form of school attire.

What a disserve and what a way to fail these kids.

The woes of humanity will l only get worse from here.

I have always derided these award shows. Not mainly or only for what they are, but because they literally force people to watch them(in the sense that is all over the media and weak-minded people who mostly have their TV sets on all day, almost cannot choose not to watch it), watch this exotic, extravagant pedantic artists get all fancy to receive an award we don't actually care if they receive or not!! 2 to 3 to 4 hours of more of it!

And the most disgusting part is that then they give this grand speeches as if they were our leaders, our representatives, our heroes.... these people who AS individual persons could be farther from exemplary or good.

If they are going to have awards ceremony, do it quietly, do not broadcast it and spear us the speeches!!

As if patriarchal societies were inherently wrong.

And as if she had not full blown benefited from it gleefully and willfully and perhaps wildly.

Every comment so far here is spot on.

What is she complaining about? Competitions? Don't take part on them then. Even babies compete with each other, patriarchy has nothing to do with it.

So if a woman has a competitive spirit she is complicit of the patriarchy now?

And women in the arts have always shared a pretty similar common ground, Mozart's sister was equally trained and promoted by her father as a musical prodigy, women artistry is recognized, praised and held dearly throughout history and all over different cultures.

What a self promoting goading act. Shameless.

High schools don't allow girls to wear their natural hair color if is not dark enough, but if they want to wear girls or boys attire, let them?

And... what is this supposed to help them with?? They are teenagers. A sole transgender student means everyone else can do as they please? If it is transgender doesn't that mean he switched from one to the other? Why the need of neutrality? It ultimate nonsense. And peddling to the mob and what is chic and populist. Also enables the teenagers to just be more rebellious and be more in your face and to want to do as they please in other realms as well. Identity is one thing. Gender another. Why can't we see this. A woman can be strong, brave, courageous, heroic, powerful, driven, etc. as A WOMAN! Likewise, a man can be sensitive, kind, gleeful, tender, nurturing, etc. as A MAN. The fact that people, and this case teens "doubt" their gender because they think if they are strong, or sensitive they must be of the opposite sex, is pure nonsense. And just reinforces, as Bronco says, the issue that personality traits and gender-bound, which they are NOT.

These kids don't to be let wear whatever they want inter-genderly, they need to know it is okay to have all kinds of personality traits as a man or a woman and there is nothing wrong to express them. And that their gender only defines their reproductive strategy and being a man or a woman with an spectrum of personality traits only enriches his or her experience and that of humanity as well. And that they can thus have a happy plentiful life as a man or a woman, without changing what is naturally and biologically given.

@ebisen Today  11:55 am JST

I understand. Trauma, as PTSD and all other degrees is also a reality, so the fact that it some symbols represent evil and trigger memories, etc. is not something to be taken lightly either.

That being said, part of the healing process against trauma is to disassociate the actual evil act from the peripheral things that just happened to randomly concur or be associated with it. This is what makes trauma so awful and hard on victims, because totally innocuous things like a song, a smell, a sign, a color, etc. that can be found in everyday life become attached to the evil event, making it difficult to move past it.

Disassociating makes it easier for survivors. But it doesn't mean forgetting or ignoring the fact that it was used as such.

As you mention understanding both sides is necessary.

And lack of empathy, like the comment you mention is not the right way forward.

@ebisen

symbol of evil

Surely, we all understand how symbols work, a random shape is associated with a concept, and idea, a group... and voila, you've got yourself a symbol.

And as such all kinds of symbols have been for all throughout human history been used for good and evil and all things in between. Strating with countries flags, or people's flags, religious signs like crosses (Egyptian and so forth), stars and pentagrams, moons and half-moons, etc., etc. Nazis killed Jews and Jehovah's Witness under the swastika and identified Jews with a star and Witnesses with a purple triangle, the Jew star is in turn, I suppose, not liked by Palestinian supporters. And other of their countless war enemies through history; the Japanese rising sun flag and current flag is hated in several places throughout Asia, several native cultures and religions were annihilated under the Spaniard catholic cross in Latin America, under the moor half-moon countless Europeans were enslaved and castrated. But on the other hand all these symbols have also meant help, rescue, compassion at different places and stages of history for different peoples.

All in all, symbols are just a deliberate association of two inherently UNRELATED things. And as such we should be able to at will separate them FROM what others unilaterally use as a sign for their self predications.

It also depends on the CONTEXT in which is being used.

Only a bonehead would think a swastika in a hindu environment is a symbol of evil.

We need to be smart.

The Japanese clearly wanted it more that the Germans, who look complacent and unwilling to give the Japanese push the caution it needed. It was well deserved for Japan.

The tenacity and audacity of the Japanese paid dividends, no doubt, with that being said Manuel Neuer played those two goals extremely poorly.

I used to play keeper for a good 10 years in my youth. As a keeper you are trained to know how to deflect a shot or a close-range pass in a way that ricochets or secondary shots are less likely. Sure, it is not always possible for many different reasons, but the basic point is to be aware of where other enemy players are, and Neuer seemed to be oblivious as to where Doan was, not even turning once towards the center of the field to check for possible pass receiving Japenese, so when the shot came he just reacted without any intention put to his deflection.

On the second goal his approach and reaction was disastrous, Asano is coming fast and at a closed angle, but nonetheless he waits a bit too much to close on him, and then when he shoots he moves his chest out of the way, instead of blocking with his chest fully to the edge of the goal post. If he doesn't move his chest out of the way, as he shouldn't have, that goal does not go in. The slow motion reply makes him look pathetic preferring to avoid the ball that block it. YAK!! Can't see how he is ever considered one of the best keepers in the world. Two huge mental blunders gave the game to the Japanese. Although as I said above, all this was caused by the tenacity and unwillingness to give up by the Japanese, and a defense that was already mentally out of the game. Still, dreadful goalkeeping.

@David BrentToday  

You should see what the Japanese manual laborers do to their Vietnamese coworkers on the construction site.

I doubt many know what you are talking about.

Would you care to enlighten us?

What is the leading cause of death in 18 40 year olds?

Drug overdoses have claimed the lives of over 100,000 people in the United States - Fentanyl was reportedly the cause of two-thirds of them. According to the CDC, Fentanyl is now the number one cause of death for Americans ages 18 to 45.

it is a little weird to think drug cartels willing be killing their clientele.... and possibly deterring their future customers. What gives?

Don't know the Japanese words he said, but one thing is "illness" and another is" acquired psychological disorder". These are two different things. Though it has long being discarded as an illness, it is not universally set that is is not some sort of a disorder. Specially since scientific studies regarding its physiology were halted when it became politically accepted. Still some 20 years ago there hard science studies showing mother hormones in some cases of placenta irregularities causing the fetus not to be completely sealed off from the mothers internal fluids, reaching the fetus and affecting the forming neuroreceptors.

Also before political becoming politically correct, psychologically speaking it was well understood that as behavioral anomaly not all homosexual people "became" or "were born" homosexual the same way. Several patterns were known, and most probably still occur, just nobody is taking data anymore.

What this all means is that although politically is has been frowned upon to question the normality of "OKness" of homosexuality, that alone does not make it right, when previous historic data shows there are several factors involved (physiologically the above mentioned mother's chemicals, psychologically and or developmentally single parentness, sexual abuse at any stage, loneliness, curiosity, psychological or emotional neglect, opportunity, adaptation, compensation, and even perversion, hatred and decadence), which in turn it is clearly never going to be flatly accepted by conservative people. Not that homosexual people as people don't deserve as full of a life as they can. But their standing in people's minds who know all I mentioned above, will hardly ever be as just a normal behavior. It just cannot be.

It's said the difference between good and evil is good can imagine where evil comes from, what is wants, evil however cannot imagine good or what it wants.

If we are so good and saintly we should be able to imagine without judging what state of mind or state of affairs led her to this. No human is perfect and so many humans lack the capacity of empathy, and the capacity to take care of others while themselves have been neglected.

We can very easily imagine her mother either did it to herself, or she had no mother, or her mother didn't show love and care to her. If she had had love and care herself it is highly unlike she would commit this.

Also those wishing this killer mother, death and suffering as punishment can be easily thought as never had experienced loving care, as a loving nurturing upbringing would not allow for such thoughts, only empathy for both child and mother, as both are part of this tragedy. Society playing a big part of this problem as well.

If you can wish this woman death and suffering you are justifying her way of thinking, in a way, because for her in that instance her child was perhaps something that grew undesirable therefore eliminating it became the choice. It's the same basic thinking: undesirable eliminate.

You better watch out your projections.

Parenting is no easy job, and it is 24/7/365. Even highly educated, efficient and caring adults have hard times at times in parenting. A single mother with who knows what emotional baggage (or not) has it way harder.

Not saying she deserves forgiving or what she did is not cruel. I am saying paying her with the same coin is what caused this situation to happen in the same place.

That is not the solution.

Healing is needed. A society that allows healing to occur.

@virusrex

Reasons why you can't bring a reference are not important, the important thing is that you can't do it, which means you accept you have no source and therefore it can't be used as an argument. If someone said "I read somewhere what you think was proved wrong" it would have the same problem, unless the source is provided it can just be ignored. You are free to not remember where you read something, but that also means you can't use it as an argument.

Hey, you are right, I am not going to win a debate having no sources to provide. But that is exactly my point, I am not trying to win ANY argument. Like I wrote, I am not trying to appease anybody about my decisions not seeking peer approval, nor reading our so I cam defend my decision on this matter. An certainly not out to convince anybody of doing what I do. Not even my family. I read and I inform myself for my own decision making that's all. So, no I don't mind or care not giving you any sources. The US Senate series of briefings on the issue are available online, it refers several dozen studies worthy of your analysis if you so choose. But I am not our to try to change you.

Finally, like I said to the other posters. I am not anti-vaccine. I just dislike people lambasting in blanket statements people who choose other that what you deem correct in this regard. Granted some are sheep and just follow without thinking, but can say the same thing for people on both sides of the divide. Most of my co workers and family juts got the vaccine cause of going with the flow, only 2 questioned themselves whether they should get it, the others just almost automatically accepted it. Aren't they fools too?

Also, you perch yourself and Science oh so high, as if science was infallible. You know science is only science if you are allowed to question it and break it down to small pieces and see if each of them holds ground.

You claim you have, and that the science supports your views at large. But your almost religious fervor towards it is very much off-putting and annoying. Science is after all just a human effort. Nothing divine or sacred about it.

Anyways, why you are so much pro-science and your scientific background would perhaps explain your attitude. In my case, as I have posted before, after college I spent a couple of years as an understudy at an actual scientific lab for psychophysiology in my alma mater. And my college formation was rooted in the scientific method. Decades ago, before the woke ideas pervaded science as well. So I in particular don't need no lecture about science.

As most have pointed out above, 1) the anime and manga is rated for teens and young adults and above, 2) elementary school kids and below are expected and actually instructed by schools and BOE's the country wide to sleep at 9 or 9:30 depending on the district, 3) the body mutilation from sword fighting is of course a concern and small kids should not be allowed to watch it ! It's a matter of parental control.

@Gaijinjland

It's the other way around. If you actually heard what they say, they are trying to show the hypocrisy on the other side who claims abortion is a matter of "my body, my choice" but don't take the same stance with regards to vaccines, so they take their slogan and show it to them so show the hypocrisy of them.

On the other side, as with abortion, surely "your body your choice", but the point there is your baby is NOT your body, It's ANOTHER body.

@ thaonephil, theResident

I am not anti-vaccine. Whatever that means. Yes, I wrote a lot. Be kind and read it. And then comment. If you read you would see I am not anti-vaccine. If anything I would say I am anti-mandates, which stems from being anti-fascist, which in turn means not liking the imposition of someone else's will upon others who disagree with it, and which tramples otherwise established liberties or rights.

To be even clearer, I have gone ahead and got the Covid vaccine a while ago. I am not anti-vaccine.

I am anti-people trying to bully others to take the vaccine. That's all. I understand the doubts and fears against it. I went ahead and get it because of family and work reasons. That doesn't mean I agree with how this is handled by governments and how people like you treat those who don't want the vaccine.

Read to understand not to destroy. What are you so afraid of?

@virusrex

Alright, last time you posted me aa question of providing links of where I get my information. Now, I am not going to that. I will explain and please read me out.

I will not do that, because although I do read online and try to have relevant vital information, I only ever read it once, hardly ever reach out to the actual source of the scientific studies to read the actual studies. I do so while on the bus in my daily commute sometimes, for my own personal information. I never have in mind sharing them or keeping them for reference nor remembering where I read what from who or where. So to provide them is actually impossible for me, unless I retraced all my online activity the last year, which I am not doing just to appease you. Now, don't go our dismissing my conclusions just because of it. In the end it my personal responsibility with myself to make an informed decision.

Anyway, the main issue of my post is not that. Allow me to continue.

I'll level here with you. I have had vaccines before, as a child I got them and it was pretty simple, you get them, you don't get such and such deceases, straightforward and clear. As an adult the only vaccines I have had were when I travelled to China I had to get one, can't remember which, but likewise get it and you prevent getting sick. Then coming to Japan I learned about the flu vaccine, which to my surprise doesn't prevent getting sick for life or 100% but provides a boost for the immune system to fight the newer strands of flu. Or something like that, and honestly that was shaky enough for me, and I didn't wanna get it because it was not worth the effort, time, money and even the pain of the injection in my estimation for such an infection as the flu.

Fast forward and only a year after a new infection arises a vaccine is developed, and WITHOUT any long term results everyone HAS to get it is plenty of suspicious for me. Surely, you can dismiss it as conspirationalism, but given all the issues, if YOU virusex still fully trust it you come as a coincidentionalist and naive as well. Let's delve a little here. So you defend the pharmaceuticals as "not just a CEO wanting to get richer" since even doctors and nurses get the vaccine. First of all, you assign to much validity to the judgement of doctors and nurses in this regard. For one, the several nurses I one personally have the slightest scientifically proficient mind, and just do what doctors say. As for doctors, I remember my family doctor back in my home country having impeccable white doctor robes engraved with his name, and below his name a likewise huge engraving of a pharmaceutical company... if h were to have recommended me a vaccine for Covid from that company I would have seriously being unamused. Next some doctors respect patient consent, my doctor here in Japan, laid it very clearly to me "it's your choice, I don't see valid to recommend it to you or not, it may help you but it is not 100% safe just as Covid is not 100% deadly".

And finally, we are talking big pharma here, you do realize just a couple of years ago the main Covid vaccine company was embroiled in a huge liability lawsuit for damages and malpractice and paid billions of dollars? And yet you put your trust at their feet.

Also, have you seen the sponsorship of TV newsrooms and stations and media all over the US and world, how many big pharma names are there? No wonder counter arguments against the vaccines no matter how sound are never shown any time.

As I said above, you can dismiss any of this as crazy conspiracy theories, but is doing so I say you are just taking these blatant conflicts of interests as "non issues" or "mere coincidences" which shows quite a lack of sagacity, prudence and caution.

Of course, I am not saying I can proof a large scale conspiracy to cull mankind or something. Nor I am saying I believe n such thing. What I am saying is the product in the street out there comes from this places where rarely the ultimate good is the objective and where being first is more important that being correct or good or safe. Surely you realize pharmaceuticals are BUSINESSES that make money from TREATING decease NIT curing it. As no decease means no business or a dwindling one. And surely you should recognize the are corrupt people everywhere. I am sure there institutions, countries, parties you don't trust for their corruption alone (irrelevant of what they say or stand for). And no place is completely out of it. You know what conditions big pharma has put on countries to provide the vaccines, right? No liability clauses, really?? The government has to take the liability, not the company! WOW.

So in the end it's a matter of trust. And no, for the situation as it now, with vaccine mandates for a vaccine that doesn't even guarantee free of infection, and that was speedily developed, and for which the very definition of what a vaccine is was changed (it's true, check it out, the US Senate panel on the safety of the vaccine had this issue brought up to them, the briefing is online) to include the MRN (or something like that) protein precursors which was never used before for vaccines. And the long term consequences of including a full chain spike protein are unknown yet of course, but could possibly include DNA mutations?? You seriously wanna put this in everybody's body??

When not even regular vaccines that DO prevent the contagion of viral deceases are not even mandatory in countries like Japan and others. The Croatian president said it very clearly: "what is the objective of a mass mandate of Covid vaccines? is not getting rid of the virus, and is not getting contagions to zero. It's reducing risks of contagion and death to yet realistically unknown levels" So, why the urge, and zeal to push forward with them mandates while stomping every over civil right and liberty?? Again, you have to think if the objective matches the means (for reference the objective they claim is the same as for the flu vaccines, which have NO mandate whatsoever anywhere in the world) and follow the pockets of those promoting it, be it political parties or media outlets. I fear more the error of men in a rush to create a most profitable item than my chances of surviving a 0.0003 deadly virus on my own. And I also don't fear you having it giving it to me, more that your zeal to ruin my life for not getting a vaccine riddled with risk all over it.

Finally, honestly your zeal is dumbfoundingly blind. You want the vaccine, sure go get it. You don't have any doubts and dismiss all coincidences above as just such and trust all the players in this issue, fine, be my guest. But that is you. ONLY you. And as so, all other individuals are entitled to their OWN judgement. So back off you zealot.